Department of Psychology, Faculty of Science and Technology, Bournemouth University, Talbot Campus, Poole, Fern Barrow, BH12 5BB, UK.
School of Psychology, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Psychol Res. 2022 Jun;86(4):1029-1053. doi: 10.1007/s00426-021-01554-x. Epub 2021 Aug 13.
Despite instructions to ignore the irrelevant word in the Stroop task, it robustly influences the time it takes to identify the color, leading to performance decrements (interference) or enhancements (facilitation). The present review addresses two questions: (1) What levels of processing contribute to Stroop effects; and (2) Where does attentional selection occur? The methods that are used in the Stroop literature to measure the candidate varieties of interference and facilitation are critically evaluated and the processing levels that contribute to Stroop effects are discussed. It is concluded that the literature does not provide clear evidence for a distinction between conflicting and facilitating representations at phonological, semantic and response levels (together referred to as informational conflict), because the methods do not currently permit their isolated measurement. In contrast, it is argued that the evidence for task conflict as being distinct from informational conflict is strong and, thus, that there are at least two loci of attentional selection in the Stroop task. Evidence suggests that task conflict occurs earlier, has a different developmental trajectory and is independently controlled which supports the notion of a separate mechanism of attentional selection. The modifying effects of response modes and evidence for Stroop effects at the level of response execution are also discussed. It is argued that multiple studies claiming to have distinguished response and semantic conflict have not done so unambiguously and that models of Stroop task performance need to be modified to more effectively account for the loci of Stroop effects.
尽管在斯特鲁普任务中被指示忽略不相关的词,但它仍然强烈地影响了识别颜色所需的时间,导致表现下降(干扰)或增强(促进)。本综述解决了两个问题:(1)哪些加工水平对斯特鲁普效应有贡献;(2)注意选择在哪里发生?斯特鲁普文献中用于测量候选干扰和促进变体的方法受到了批判性的评估,并讨论了对斯特鲁普效应有贡献的加工水平。结论是,文献并没有提供清晰的证据来区分语音、语义和反应水平上的冲突和促进表征(统称为信息冲突),因为这些方法目前无法对其进行单独测量。相比之下,有强有力的证据表明任务冲突与信息冲突不同,因此,在斯特鲁普任务中有至少两个注意选择的位置。有证据表明,任务冲突发生得更早,具有不同的发展轨迹,并独立于信息冲突受到控制,这支持了注意选择的分离机制的概念。还讨论了反应模式的修饰作用以及在反应执行水平上的斯特鲁普效应的证据。有人认为,有多项声称区分了反应和语义冲突的研究并没有明确地做到这一点,而且斯特鲁普任务表现的模型需要进行修改,以更有效地解释斯特鲁普效应的位置。