Congruency precues moderate item-specific proportion congruency effects

被引:0
作者
Keith A. Hutchison
Julie M. Bugg
You Bin Lim
Mariana R. Olsen
机构
[1] Montana State University,Department of Psychology
[2] Washington University,Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences
来源
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics | 2016年 / 78卷
关键词
Stroop; Item-specific proportion congruency; Preparatory cues;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The item-specific proportion congruency (ISPC) effect refers to the reduction in the Stroop effect for items (e.g., words) that mostly appear in an incongruent format, as compared to items that mostly appear in a congruent format. It is thought to demonstrate reactive control of word-reading processes. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis that using explicit, trial-by-trial congruency precues to proactively guide attention during a color-word Stroop task could reduce the otherwise robust ISPC effect. In Experiment 1, the precueing manipulation was employed alongside a manipulation traditionally thought to influence proactive control of word-reading processes (i.e., list proportion congruence [list PC]). Precueing participants with 100 %-valid precues eliminated both the ISPC effect and the list PC effect. In Experiment 2, we used 70 %-valid congruency precues to direct participants to generally expect conflict or congruence on a given trial. ISPC effects were selectively reduced when the participants expected conflict. These results suggest that precueing influences engagement in proactive control and, as a result, reduces the impact of item-specific and list-based tendencies to direct attention toward or away from word reading.
引用
收藏
页码:1087 / 1103
页数:16
相关论文
共 138 条
[1]  
Abrahamse EL(2013)Attention modulation by proportion congruency: The asymmetrical list shifting effect Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition 39 1552-1562
[2]  
Duthoo W(1996)The perception of number from the separability of the stimulus: The Stroop effect revisited Memory & Cognition 24 557-572
[3]  
Notebaert W(2014)ISPC effect is not observed when the word comes too late: A time course analysis Frontiers in Psychology 5 1410-2767
[4]  
Risko EF(2010)Behavioral and neural evidence for item-specific performance monitoring Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 22 2758-276
[5]  
Algom D(2012)Rethinking the role of automaticity in cognitive control Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 65 268-652
[6]  
Dekel A(2001)Conflict monitoring and cognitive control Psychological Review 108 624-113
[7]  
Pansky A(2012)The variable nature of cognitive control: A dual mechanisms framework Trends in Cognitive Sciences 16 106-309
[8]  
Atalay NB(2012)Dissociating levels of cognitive control: The case of Stroop interference Current Directions in Psychological Science 21 302-587
[9]  
Misirlisoy M(2014)Conflict-triggered top-down control: Default mode, last resort, or no such thing? Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition 40 567-389
[10]  
Blais C(2015)The relative attractiveness of distractors and targets affects the coming and going of item-specific control: Evidence from flanker tasks Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 77 373-936