Annette Taylor, Ph. D. wrote:
It bothers me when we discuss the Stroop effect that color-naming, a low-
level, simple physical process, which is certainly automatized, is inhibited by a higher level, more complex and serial process, reading, which is also certainly automatized. Why should the higher level, more complicated process dominate the lower level simpler process? Am I over-thinking this?
There is a second explanation of the Stroop effect that doesn't rely on the speed/automaticity argument.
Take a typical case, the person is supposed to name the color of the ink of a word. The ink is red but the letters spell the word "blue." The person is supposed to respond *verbally* by naming the color. So the person is supposed to treat the task as a verbal task (by providing the color name) and, at the same time, not treat it as a verbal task (by not reading the word).
A second explanation is that you have interference between these two aspects of the task. The magnitude of the Stroop effect is reduced when you go to nonverbal means of indicating ink color.
Ken
Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph. D.
Department of Psychology
University of San Diego 5998 Alcala Park
San Diego, CA 92110
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------- Kenneth M. Steele, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Department of Psychology http://www.psych.appstate.edu Appalachian State University Boone, NC 28608 USA ---------------------------------------------------------------
--- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
