Taylor S F, Kornblum S, Lauber E J, Minoshima S, Koeppe R A
Division of Nuclear Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, USA.
Neuroimage. 1997 Aug;6(2):81-92. doi: 10.1006/nimg.1997.0285.
The Stroop task, in which subjects must name the color of letters that spell color words different than the color-to-be-named, provides an important experimental paradigm for the study of selective attention. Cerebral blood flow activation studies have not always demonstrated consistent activation patterns; inconsistent results may reflect nonspecific responses, such as arousal or anticipation, rather than cerebral networks specific to Stroop interference processing. In order to identify regions consistently implicated in Stroop interference processing, we undertook two experiments with a Stroop interference paradigm and contrasting lexical and nonlexical control conditions. In our first experiment, standard Stroop stimuli, e.g., the word "RED" displayed in a green font, were contrasted with color naming of the font of noncolor words and color naming of a false font. In our second experiment, we compared Stroop stimuli with colored symbols and a control condition designed to elicit nonspecific interference-taboo words displayed in color fonts. Only two brain regions showed a consistent CBF change in both experiments. Activation in the left inferior frontal gyrus reflected processing more specific to the Stroop task, while deactivation in the right superior temporal gyrus occurred for the Stroop and the taboo conditions, consistent with more nonspecific processing. Activation in the anterior cingulate cortex occurred in only one comparison in one experiment and may not reflect functions central to overcoming Stroop interference.
斯特鲁普任务要求受试者说出与待命名颜色不同的颜色词所拼写字母的颜色，它为选择性注意的研究提供了一个重要的实验范式。脑血流激活研究并非总能显示出一致的激活模式；不一致的结果可能反映的是非特异性反应，如唤醒或预期，而非特定于斯特鲁普干扰处理的脑网络。为了确定始终与斯特鲁普干扰处理相关的脑区，我们采用斯特鲁普干扰范式进行了两项实验，并设置了词汇和非词汇对照条件。在我们的第一个实验中，将标准的斯特鲁普刺激（例如，用绿色字体显示的单词“RED”）与非颜色词字体的颜色命名以及错误字体的颜色命名进行了对比。在我们的第二个实验中，我们将斯特鲁普刺激与彩色符号以及一个旨在引发非特异性干扰的对照条件（用彩色字体显示的禁忌词）进行了比较。在两个实验中，只有两个脑区显示出一致的脑血流变化。左侧额下回的激活反映了对斯特鲁普任务更具特异性的处理，而右侧颞上回在斯特鲁普任务和禁忌条件下均出现失活，这与更多的非特异性处理一致。前扣带回皮质的激活仅在一个实验中的一次比较中出现，可能并不反映克服斯特鲁普干扰的核心功能。
