Response Time Distribution Analysis of Semantic and Response Interference in a Manual Response Stroop Task

This data was imported from PubMed:

Authors: Hasshim, N., Downes, M., Bate, S. and Parris, B.A.

http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/32493/

Journal: Exp Psychol

Volume: 66

Issue: 3

Pages: 231-238

eISSN: 2190-5142

DOI: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000445

Previous analyses of response time distributions have shown that the Stroop effect is observed in the mode (μ) and standard deviation (σ) of the normal part of the distribution, as well as its tail (τ). Specifically, interference related to semantic and response processes has been suggested to specifically affect the mode and tail, respectively. However, only one study in the literature has directly manipulated semantic interference, and none manipulating response interference. The present research aims to address this gap by manipulating both semantic and response interference in a manual response Stroop task, and examining how these components of Stroop interference affect the response time distribution. Ex-Gaussian analysis showed both semantic and response conflict to only affect τ. Analyzing the distribution by rank-ordered response times (Vincentizing) showed converging results as the magnitude of both semantic and response conflict increased with slower response times. Additionally, response conflict appeared earlier on the distribution compared to semantic conflict. These findings further highlight the difficulty in attributing specific psychological processes to different parameters (i.e., μ, σ, and τ). The effect of different response modalities on the makeup of Stroop interference is also discussed.

This data was imported from Scopus:

Authors: Hasshim, N., Downes, M., Bate, S. and Parris, B.A.

http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/32493/

Journal: Experimental Psychology

Volume: 66

Issue: 3

Pages: 231-238

eISSN: 2190-5142

ISSN: 1618-3169

DOI: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000445

© 2019 Hogrefe Publishing. Previous analyses of response time distributions have shown that the Stroop effect is observed in the mode (μ) and standard deviation (σ) of the normal part of the distribution, as well as its tail (τ). Specifically, interference related to semantic and response processes has been suggested to specifically affect the mode and tail, respectively. However, only one study in the literature has directly manipulated semantic interference, and none manipulating response interference. The present research aims to address this gap by manipulating both semantic and response interference in a manual response Stroop task, and examining how these components of Stroop interference affect the response time distribution. Ex-Gaussian analysis showed both semantic and response conflict to only affect τ. Analyzing the distribution by rank-ordered response times (Vincentizing) showed converging results as the magnitude of both semantic and response conflict increased with slower response times. Additionally, response conflict appeared earlier on the distribution compared to semantic conflict. These findings further highlight the difficulty in attributing specific psychological processes to different parameters (i.e., μ, σ, and τ). The effect of different response modalities on the makeup of Stroop interference is also discussed.

This data was imported from Web of Science (Lite):

Authors: Hasshim, N., Downes, M., Bate, S. and Parris, B.A.

http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/32493/

Journal: EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY

Volume: 66

Issue: 3

Pages: 231-238

eISSN: 2190-5142

ISSN: 1618-3169

DOI: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000445

The data on this page was last updated at 05:09 on February 27, 2020.