Verhaeghen P, De Meersman L
Department of Psychology, University of Leuven, Belgium.
Psychol Aging. 1998 Mar;13(1):120-6. doi: 10.1037//0882-7974.13.1.120.
In this meta-analysis, data from 20 studies comparing younger and older adults on the Stroop interference effect, contained in 15 articles, were analyzed. No significant difference was found in the Stroop interference effect, expressed as mean standardized difference, between the 2 age groups (for younger adults: d = 2.04; for older adults: d = 2.17). Moderator variables were present, but these did not produce age differences. Brinley analysis showed that a single regression line with a slowing factor of 1.9 described the data well (R2 = .83) and confirmed that no Age x Condition interaction was present in the data. Likewise, no Age x Condition interaction was found when the data were fitted to the information loss model; the age ratio of decay rates was estimated to be 1.4. Consequently, the apparent age-sensitivity of the Stroop interference effect appears to be merely an artifact of general slowing.
在这项荟萃分析中，对15篇文章中包含的20项比较年轻人和老年人在斯特鲁普干扰效应上的数据进行了分析。两个年龄组在以平均标准化差异表示的斯特鲁普干扰效应上未发现显著差异（年轻人：d = 2.04；老年人：d = 2.17）。存在调节变量，但这些变量并未产生年龄差异。布林利分析表明，一条斜率为1.9的单一回归线能很好地描述数据（R2 = 0.83），并证实数据中不存在年龄×条件交互作用。同样，当数据拟合到信息损失模型时，也未发现年龄×条件交互作用；衰减率的年龄比估计为1.4。因此，斯特鲁普干扰效应明显的年龄敏感性似乎仅仅是总体反应速度减慢的一种假象。
