Department of Psychology and Sociology, Georgia Southwestern State University, Americus, GA, USA.
Department of Psychology, Shippensburg University, Shippensburg, PA, USA.
Psychol Rep. 2020 Aug;123(4):1207-1225. doi: 10.1177/0033294119843220. Epub 2019 May 6.
Two forms of the Stroop task have produced contradictory findings regarding unconscious perceptual processing. Emotional Stroop task studies with prime words presented at an objective threshold (i.e., subliminal) produce Stroop-like effects, but comparable studies conducted with classic Stroop stimuli do not produce Stroop effects. We tested the possibility that differences in the display appearance might explain this discrepancy. Color word prime stimuli from the traditional Stroop task were used with display characteristics based upon the emotional Stroop studies. There was a Stroop effect for the relatively long prime stimulus durations (59, 87, or 108 milliseconds) but not for the brief durations (18, 24, or 38 milliseconds). Accordingly, the discrepancy in research findings cannot be attributed to simple differences in display methodology. The failure to find strong evidence of unconscious perceptual processing is consistent with the negative findings from some emotional Stroop studies that use subliminal stimulus presentations.
两种形式的斯特鲁普任务对于无意识知觉加工产生了相互矛盾的发现。使用在客观阈值(即阈下)呈现的启动词的情绪斯特鲁普任务研究产生了类似斯特鲁普的效应,但使用经典斯特鲁普刺激进行的可比研究没有产生斯特鲁普效应。我们检验了显示外观差异是否可能解释这种差异的可能性。使用基于情绪斯特鲁普研究的显示特征,使用传统斯特鲁普任务的颜色词启动刺激。对于相对较长的启动刺激持续时间(59、87 或 108 毫秒)存在斯特鲁普效应,但对于短暂持续时间(18、24 或 38 毫秒)则没有。因此,研究结果的差异不能归因于显示方法的简单差异。未能发现无意识知觉加工的有力证据与使用阈下刺激呈现的一些情绪斯特鲁普研究的负面结果一致。