Stroop interference phenomenon in the context of lexical access theories
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu16.2018.104Abstract
The paper discusses a psycholinguistic approach to the empirical data obtained from the Stroop test and its modifications. In the classical Stroop test participants are required to name as quickly as possible the color in which a word is written, while ignoring the word meaning itself. Under certain conditions, the ignored information interferes with the naming of the color, resulting in slowed, error-prone responding. In psycholinguistics Stroop interference is considered as an inevitable consequence of speech production. Its explanation is given in several theories of lexical access, which are reviewed in the paper. Two groups of theories of lexical access are analyzed in the article: the theories of relative activation (the model of W.La Heij and colleagues, the model of A.Roelofs, and the conception of R.Abdel Rahman and A.Melinger) and the theories of absolute activation (Response Exclusion Account and the model of K.Mulatti and colleagues). It is postulated in the theories of the first group that Stroop interference occurs during the stage of response selection. According to the theories of the second group, Stroop interference occurs at the late stages of stimuli processing due to inappropriate response blocking. In conclusion, the author states that theories of lexical access fail to explain revealed interference phenomena. The ways of further development of the psycholinguistic theories to Stroop interference are discussed.
Keywords:
Stroop interference, Stroop test, lexical access, speech production, lexical competition, psycholinguistics
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
References
MacLeod C.M. Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 1991, vol. 109, pp. 163–203.
Van Maanen L., Van Rijn H., Borst J.P. Stroop and Picture-Word Interference are Two Sides of the Same Coin. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2009, vol. 16 (6), pp. 987–999.
Starreveld P.A., La Heij W. Picture-word interference is a Stroop effect: A theoretical analysis and new empirical findings. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2017, vol. 24, pp. 721–733.
Klein G. S. Semantic power measured through the interference of words with color naming. American Journal of Psychology, 1964, vol. 177, pp. 576–588.
Geng J., Schnur T.T., Janssen N. Relative speed of processing affects interference in Stroop and picture–word interference paradigms: evidence from the distractor frequency effect. Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience, 2013, vol. 29, pp. 1100–1114.
Rosinski R.R., Golinkoff R.M., Kukish K. S. Automatic semantic processing in a picture-word interference task. Child Development, 1975, vol. 46, pp. 247–253.
Levelt W.J.M., Roelofs A., Meyer A. S. A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1999, vol. 22, pp. 1–38.
Cattell J.M. The time it takes to see and name objects. Mind, 1886, vol. 11, pp. 63–65.
Stroop J.R. Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1935, vol. 18, pp. 643–662.
Steinhauser M., Maier M., Hübner R. Modeling Behavioral Measures of Error Detection in Choice Tasks: Response Monitoring Versus Conflict Monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2008, vol. 34 (1), pp. 158–176.
Mulatti C., Ceccherini L., Coltheart M. What can we learn about visual attention to multiple words from the word–word interference task? Memory & Cognition, 2015, vol. 43, pp. 121–132.
Quillian M.R. Word concepts: A theory and simulation of some basic semantic capabilities. Behavioral Science, 1967, vol. 12, pp. 410–430.
Collins A.M., Loftus E.F. A spreading activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 1975, vol. 82, pp. 407–428.
Roelofs A. A spreading-activation theory of lemma retrieval in speaking. Cognition, 1992, vol. 42, pp. 107–142.
Dell G. S. A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 1986, vol. 3, pp. 283–321.
Melinger A., Abdel Rahman R. Lexical selection is competitive: Evidence from indirectly activated semantic associates during picture naming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 2013, vol. 39 (2), pp. 348–364.
Coltheart M., Rastle K., Perry C., Langdon R., Ziegler J. DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 2001, vol. 108, pp. 204–256.
Mahon B.Z., Costa A., Peterson R., Vargas K.A., Caramazza A. Lexical selection is not by competition: A reinterpretation of semantic interference and facilitation effects in the picture-word interference paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2007, vol. 33, pp. 503–535.
Spalek K., Damian M.F., Bölte J. Is lexical selection in spoken word production competitive? Introduction to the special issue on lexical competition in language production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2013, vol. 28 (5), pp. 597–614.
Roelofs A., Piai V., Schriefers H. Context effects and selective attention in picture naming and word reading: Competition versus response exclusion. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2013, vol. 28, pp. 655–671.
Starreveld P.A., La Heij W. Time-course analysis of semantic and orthographic context effects in picture naming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1996, vol. 22, pp. 896–918.
Bloem I., La Heij W. Semantic facilitation and semantic interference in word translation: Implications for models of lexical access. Journal of Memory and Language, 2003, vol. 48, pp. 468–488.
Kuipers J.R., La Heij W. Semantic facilitation in category and action naming: Testing the message congruency account. Journal of Memory and Language, 2008, vol. 58, pp. 123–139.
Roelofs A. Goal-referenced selection of verbal action: Modeling attentional control in the Stroop task. Psychological Review, 2003, vol. 110, pp. 88–125.
Abdel Rahman R., Melinger A. Semantic context effects in language production: A swinging lexical network proposal and a review. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2009, vol. 24, pp. 713–734.
Caramazza A. How many levels of processing are there in lexical access? Cognitive Neuropsychology, 1997, vol. 14, pp. 177–208.
Roelofs A., Piai V. Aspects of competition in word production: Reply to Mahon and Navarrete. Cortex, 2015, vol. 64, pp. 420–424.
Glaser M.O., Glaser W.R. Time course analysis of the Stroop phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 1982, vol. 8, pp. 875–894.
Glaser W.R., Dungelhoff F.-J. The time course of picture-word interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1984, vol. 10, pp. 640–654.
Schriefers H., Meyer A. S., Levelt W.J.M. Exploring the time course of lexical access in production: Picture-word interference studies. Journal of Memory and Language, 1990, vol. 29, pp. 86–102.
Roelofs A. From Popper to Lakatos: A case for cumulative computational modeling. Ed. by A.Cutler. Twenty-first century psycholinguistics: Four cornerstones. Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum, 2005, pp. 313–330.
Roelofs A., Piai V. Aspects of competition in word production: Reply to Mahon and Navarrete. Cortex, 2015, vol. 64, pp. 420–424.
Glaser W.R., Glaser M.O. Context effects on Stroop-like word and picture processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1989, vol. 118, pp. 13–42.
Vigliocco G., Vinson D.P., Siri S. Semantic similarity and grammatical class in naming actions. Cognition, 2005, vol. 94, pp. 91–100.
De Simone F., Collina S. The Picture–Word Interference Paradigm: Grammatical Class Effects in Lexical Production. Journal of Psycholingustic Research, 2016, vol. 45 (5), pp. 1003–1019.
Lupker S.J. The semantic nature of response competition in the picture-word interference task. Memory & Cognition, 1979, vol. 7, pp. 485–495.
Goodman G. S., Haith M.M., Guttentag R.E., Rao S. Automatic processing of word meaning: Intralingual and interlingual interference. Child Development, 1985, vol. 56, 103–118.
Costa A., Caramazza A. Is lexical selection in bilingual speech production language-specific? Further evidence from Spanish-English and English-Spanish bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1999, vol. 2, pp. 231–244.
Costa A., Alario F.-X., Caramazza A. On the categorical nature of the semantic interference effect in the picture-word interference paradigm. P sychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2005, vol. 12, pp. 125–131.
La Heij W., Happel B., Mulder M. Components of Stroop-like interference in word reading. Acta Psychologica, 1990, vol. 73, pp. 115–129.
Alario F.X., Segui J., Ferrand L. Semantic and associative priming in picture naming. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2000, vol. 53, pp. 741–764.
Roelofs A., Piai V., Schriefers H. Selective attention and distractor frequency in naming performance: Comment on Dhooge and Hartsuiker (2010). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2011, vol. 37, pp. 1032–1038.
Miozzo M., Caramazza A. When more is less: A counterintuitive effect of distractor frequency in picture — word interference paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2003, vol. 132, pp. 228–252.
Dhooge E., Hartsuiker R.J. The distractor frequency effect in picture-word interference: Evidence for response exclusion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2010, vol. 36, pp. 878–891.
Monsell S., Taylor T.J., Murphy K. Naming the color of a word: Is it responses or task sets that compete? Memory & Cognition, 2001, vol. 29, pp. 137–151.
McClelland J.L., Rumelhart D.E. An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception. Psychological Review, 1981, vol. 88, pp. 375–407.
Costa A., Mahon B., Savova V., Caramazza A. Level of categorization effect: A novel effect in the picture — word interference paradigm. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2003, vol. 18, pp. 205–233.
Dhooge E., Hartsuiker R.J. Lexical selection and verbal self-monitoring: Effects of lexicality, context, and time pressure in picture — word interference. Journal of Memory and Language, 2012, vol. 66, pp. 163–176.
Fox E. Negative priming from ignored distractors in visual selection: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1995, vol. 2, pp. 145–173.
La Heij W., Heikoop K.W., Akerboom S., Bloem I. Picture naming in picture context: Semantic interference or semantic facilitation? Psychology Science, 2003, vol. 45, pp. 49–62.
Damian M.F., Bowers J. S. Locus of semantic interference in picture — word interference tasks. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 2003, vol. 10, pp. 111–117.
Leoncini D. I meccanismi di accesso lessicale e il paradigma di interferenza figura — figura: tesi di dottorato. Padova, 2008, 119 p.
Morsella E., Miozzo M. Evidence for a cascade model of lexical access in speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2002, vol. 28, pp. 555–563.
Meyer A. S., Damian M.F. Activation of distractor names in the picture — picture interference paradigm. Memory & Cognition, 2007, vol. 35, pp. 494−503.
Treccani B., Mulatti C. Semantic effects in the word — word interference task: a comment on Roelofs, Piai, and Schriefers (2013). Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 2015, vol. 30 (6), pp. 700–703.
McNamara T.P. Theories of priming: I.Associative distance and lag. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1992, vol. 18, pp. 1173–1190.
Quillian M.R. Word concepts: A theory and simulation of some basic semantic capabilities. Behavioral Science, 1967, vol. 12, pp. 410–430.
Caramazza A., Costa A. Set size and repetition in the picture–word interference paradigm: Implications for models of naming. Cognition, 2001, vol. 80, pp. 291–298.
Roelofs A. Set size and repetition matter: Comment on Caramazza and Costa (2000). Cognition, 2001, vol. 80, pp. 283–290.
La Heij W., van den Hof E. Picture-word interference increases with target-set size. Psychological Research, 1995, vol. 58 (2), pp. 119–133.
Collina S., Tabossi P., De Simone F. Word production and the picture — word interference paradigm: The role of learning. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 2013, vol. 42 (5), pp. 461–473.
Krebs R.M., Fias W., Achten E., Boehler C.N. Picture novelty attenuates semantic interference and modulates concomitant neural activity in the anterior cingulate cortex and the locus coeruleus. NeuroImage, 2013, vol. 74, pp. 179–187.
Roelofs A. The WEAVER model of word-form encoding in speech production. Cognition, 1997, vol. 64, pp. 249–284.
Downloads
Published
2018-04-23
How to Cite
Сопов, М. С. (2018). Stroop interference phenomenon in the context of lexical access theories. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Psychology, 8(1), 47–69. https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu16.2018.104
Issue
Section
General psychology, personality psychology, history of psychology
License
Articles of "Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Psychology" are open access distributed under the terms of the License Agreement with Saint Petersburg State University, which permits to the authors unrestricted distribution and self-archiving free of charge.
