Response Time Distribution Analysis of Semantic and Response Interference in a Manual Response Stroop Task
Authors: Hasshim, N., Downes, M., Bate, S. and Parris, B.A.
Journal: Experimental Psychology
Volume: 66
Issue: 3
Pages: 231-238
eISSN: 2190-5142
ISSN: 1618-3169
DOI: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000445
Abstract: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.
https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/32493/
Source: Scopus
Response Time Distribution Analysis of Semantic and Response Interference in a Manual Response Stroop Task.
Authors: Hasshim, N., Downes, M., Bate, S. and Parris, B.A.
Journal: Exp Psychol
Volume: 66
Issue: 3
Pages: 231-238
eISSN: 2190-5142
DOI: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000445
Abstract: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.
https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/32493/
Source: PubMed
Response Time Distribution Analysis of Semantic and Response Interference in a Manual Response Stroop Task
Authors: Hasshim, N., Downes, M., Bate, S. and Parris, B.A.
Journal: EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY
Volume: 66
Issue: 3
Pages: 231-238
eISSN: 2190-5142
ISSN: 1618-3169
DOI: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000445
https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/32493/
Source: Web of Science (Lite)
Response Time Distribution Analysis of Semantic and Response Interference in a Manual Response Stroop Task.
Authors: Hasshim, N., Downes, M., Bate, S. and Parris, B.A.
Journal: Experimental psychology
Volume: 66
Issue: 3
Pages: 231-238
eISSN: 2190-5142
ISSN: 1618-3169
DOI: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000445
Abstract: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.
https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/32493/
Source: Europe PubMed Central
Response Time Distribution Analysis of Semantic and Response Interference in a Manual Response Stroop Task.
Authors: Hasshim, N., Downes, M., Bate, S. and Parris, B.
Journal: Experimental Psychology
Volume: 66
Issue: 3
Pages: 231-238
ISSN: 1618-3169
Abstract: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.
https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/32493/
Source: BURO EPrints