Discussion The results showed that the naming number tasks had the smallest reaction time compared to all the other. The incongruent counting task had the longest reaction time out of the other three tasks. The incongruence in the stimulus in the incongruent counting task created similar effects as the Stroop phenomenon. The hypothesis that the reaction time would be larger in the incongruent counting task was supported in this experiment, as well as the prediction that the congruent counting task will in fact have a lower reaction time than the incongruent; due to the fact of having no interference. The similar results between the Stroop phenomenon and our counting experiment can explain how interference of the previously learned reading …show more content…
His experiment consisted on observing the different reaction times on a number of identifying processes, based on the interference demonstrated on the Stroop experiment (Windes 1968). Unlike the color identification in the Stroop experiment, this experiment resembles more to the experiment conducted in class, as it matched short words with number. The experiment yield results that expressed a faster reaction times to the words. This experiment showed that the effect observed in Stroop does not belong only to color identification but other features, like small words and …show more content…
Although correlation does not equal causation, we can conclude that similar cognitive processes, such as interference and automaticity, have influenced the results in our experiment. This can be expressed by the data and in identifying and saying aloud/reading a simple number compared to quantifying simple numbers. The cognitive load of reading familiar or smaller words is lower than that of counting, thus creating perchance a longer reaction time. In the experiment conducted in class as well as the one conducted by Stroop, the issue of divided attention may have been a great factor in interference or prolonged reaction time in the conditions. Psychological refractory period which states that the response to a second stimulus is slowed down by the first stimulus being processed; this can be a cause for the finding of increased reaction time when conflicting information is given. Attention may unconsciously be given to the less complex task, which is reading/identifying, and counting the main and more complex task may be interfered by the simpler stimulus. The expectation of having a longer reaction time when conducting the incongruent task was referenced back to the Stroop effect due to the similar implications of identifying and saying aloud the color presented in the print of the color descriptive word (Stroop,
In the experiment “ Talking to plants “ from Mythbusters, potential problems include the use of greenhouses with no sound insulation, a non-homogeneous location and the use of only one specie to infer on a population. In another scientific study, researchers chose to use “ a noiseless growth chamber to prevent any effects from extraneous noise “ and the use “ growth chambers under continuous light at 28 c and 65-75% relative humidity “ in order to maintain a homogeneous location for all plants during the experiment (Jeong et al., 2008) . This helped further explain the findings because with the use of noiseless chambers you can assure that the only noise that the plant was receiving was the one given in the treatment and a valid conclusion
...to recover cups from drawers while memorizing the letters inside the cups. The first two experiments used forward serial recall while the third experiment used free recall. The study conducted conflicted with the results of serial position curve. In this study, the recency effect was eliminated and the primacy effect was attained. Although previous studies were able to show that the recency effect can eliminated if there is a sufficient amount of interference after learning, the same reasoning could not be applied in this study, as the perceptual task was not preformed longer here. These findings provide evidence that the recency effect was eliminated due to motor interference. This study suggests that demanding motor tasks effects memory due to proactive interference. Thus, Serial position experiment can aid I adjusting our current knowledge about memory.
Other areas of psychophysics determine the difference in sensitivity for different individuals. Some observers have a tendency to respond to certain stimuli in a distinct way, which is known as response bias. In order to sort out the problem of response bias, signal detection theory (which identifies two distinct responses in sensory detection) is used. The way this is done is by administering an initial test to establish the observer’s sensitivity, followed by a second test which establishes if the observer possesses a response bias...
Upon choosing an experiment to do, one stumbled upon of the experiment of the Stroop Effect under the categories of attention and automaticity. It created an intrigue in one, which caused one to choose it as his or her experiment. Firstly, after clicking on the experiment, one had to choose the setting that best suited him or her. One chose to do two trials of the experiment. The first trial one chose to have the condition to be congruent words, the colour of the words to be red,...
The purpose of this experiment was to examine the widely used paradigm, the Stroop effect, and the difference in reaction time between three conditions. 357 university students were involved. A repeated measures design was used for three conditions: congruent, incongruent and non-colour. Participants were required to look at coloured words and name the ink colour, whilst ignoring the actual word. The results show that in the congruent condition, reaction time was faster and fewer errors
At the cognitive level of analysis humans are seen as behavioral entrepreneurs. Cognitive researchers have been interested in how verbal reaction is effected during interference or inhibition. According to Craig and Lockhart (1972) information is processed two ways. Shallow processing takes two forms one being structural processing (appearance), this occurs when only the physical qualities of something is encoded i.e. what the letters spell versus the color of the word. Shallow processing only involves maintenance rehearsal and leads to fairly short-term retention of information. Deep processing involves elaboration rehearsal which is a more meaningful analysis (e.g. images, thinking, associations etc.) of information and leads to better recall. It is generally easier for people to interpret the word itself which involves deep processing than to interpret the colors of the word which involves shallow processing. According to the speed of processing model word processing is much faster than color processing, thus, in a situation of interference between words and colors, when the task is to report the color, the word information arrives at the decision process stage earlier than the color information, and in result processing confusion.
Maintaining attention on relevant stimuli and simultaneously suppressing the irrelevant information is essential for an individual to process the information successfully. Attentional top down control in the presence of interference has been widely studied using the Stroop paradigm. The Stroop effect was first described about 70 years ago (Stroop, 1935). But it was intensively studied in cognitive neuroscience as a viable research tool for investigation of perceptual and cognitive abilities (Dyer & Severance, 1973; Jensen & Rohwer, 1966; MacLeod, 1991). In spite of many modifications throughout the years, the basic principle remains the same. In classical Stroop task, the participants name the colours of the inks in which incongruent colour words are printed (e.g., RED printed in blue ink) while ignoring the words. Participants took longer time to name the ink colours when presented with incongruent colour words than when presented with colour control stimuli (e.g., colour patches).
When conducting a Stroop experiment we look at reaction time. Reaction time is measured when reading names of colors and when naming words. There is research that provide us with information that says that
There were several predictions made by the class before the experiment was run. The highest reaction time was predicted to be at the 180 degrees condition, with the lowest reaction time at 0 degrees, increasing in both directions toward 180 degrees. Also, the average reversed-figure reaction time was expected to be higher than the average normal time.
The purpose of these three distinct methods of measuring mental chronometry is to separate the subcomponents that theoretically comprise a mental reaction RT (O'Shea & Bashore, 2012). The first method, referred to as a-method, actually originated from work done by an astronomer Aldof Hirsch (Canales 2001). Hirsch’s studies were conducted in the 1860’s and consisted of repeated exposure of a single stimulus to a subject. The subjects were simply instructed to give a fixed response when they perceived the stimulus. The assumption was that the RT, being the time from presentation to response, was a representation of the time needed for the processes associated with transmission of basic stimuli and the activation of motor information through the nervous system. This was a process that did not involve any decision making regarding the stimulus given and choice of response and due to these task restrictions, this type of stimulus-response paradigm is termed ‘simple reactions’.
The Little Albert experiment has become a widely known case study that is continuously discussed by a large number of psychology professionals. In 1920, behaviorist John Watson and his assistant Rosalie Rayner began to conduct one of the first experiments done with a child. Stability played a major factor in choosing Albert for this case study, as Watson wanted to ensure that they would do as little harm as possible during the experiment. Watson’s method of choice for this experiment was to use principles of classic conditioning to create a stimulus in children that would result in fear. Since Watson wanted to condition Albert, a variety of objects were used that would otherwise not scare him. These objects included a white rat, blocks, a rabbit, a dog, a fur coat, wool, and a Santa Claus mask. Albert’s conditioning began with a series of emotional tests that became part of a routine in which Watson and Rayner were determining whether other stimuli’s could cause fear.
The Stroop Effect is widely known for its accomplishment and psychological relevance. The first experiment was conducted by James McKeen Cattel and Wilhelm Maximilian Wundt. They set out to explain and find why it take longer processing time when naming an object and/or color (Stroop, J. R., 1992). Being able to understand this cognitive process of Reaction Time (RT) allowed experimenters to devised procedures to further prove the concept. There are many reasons why RT and cognitive function interference can occur. It was termed The Stroop Effect after John Ridley Stroop who studied interference and published an article in 1935 outlining his findings. While, was not the first to propose this effect he did however, revolutionized the method in which interference can
The stroop effect works by the use of words on their own have a much stronger influence over a person’s ability to say the color. The interference that occurs between the different information received by the brain causes a conflict to occur which happens because of what the words say and what the color of the words mean.
Doerksen & Shimamura (2001) conducted three experiments to test this. For all experiments, they used 24 undergraduates from University of California, Berkeley. In the first experiment, 164 words were produced, 64 neutral and 64 emotional. Participants silently watched the randomised words on the monitor, which were shown for two seconds each for five minutes. The words were also either in yellow or blue. After this, participants then wrote down as many of the words they could recall. Following this, the words were then shown in black, and the participants had to determine which of the words were in yellow, blue or was a new word. Experiment two was conducted similarly, except the words were shown in black with a white background, which had a yellow or blue border. A third experiment was then conducted, similar to the second experiment except the emotional words were replaced with categorical words. From conducting these experiments, Doerksen & Shimamura (2001) got similar results for all three
McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. Psychological review, 88(5), 375.