Accounting for Proportion Congruency Effects in the Stroop Task in a Confounded Setup: Retrieval of Stimulus-Response Episodes Explains it All
Proportion congruency (PC) effects on the strength of distractor interference were investigated in a high-powered (n = 109), pre-registered experiment in which participants had to identify the ink color of color words. Replicating the standard PC effect, Stroop interference was larger in blocks comp...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Ubiquity Press
2022-06-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Cognition |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.journalofcognition.org/articles/232 |
| _version_ | 1811325724659810304 |
|---|---|
| author | Klaus Rothermund Nathalie Gollnick Carina G. Giesen |
| author_facet | Klaus Rothermund Nathalie Gollnick Carina G. Giesen |
| author_sort | Klaus Rothermund |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Proportion congruency (PC) effects on the strength of distractor interference were investigated in a high-powered (n = 109), pre-registered experiment in which participants had to identify the ink color of color words. Replicating the standard PC effect, Stroop interference was larger in blocks comprising mostly congruent word-color combinations, compared to blocks comprising mostly incongruent trials. These block-level differences in the strength of the Stroop effect were eliminated after controlling for (a) the congruency of the most recent episode in which the current word had been presented (“episodic retrieval of control states”), and also after controlling for (b) the response relation of this episode and the current trial (“episodic response retrieval”). Controlling for the congruency in trial n-1 (congruency sequence effect, CSE), irrespective of word relation did not eliminate the PC effect, nor did controlling for immediate exact and partial repetitions. When predicting PC effects simultaneously by both types of episodic retrieval processes, only episodic response retrieval explained the effect. Our findings attest to the importance of episodic response retrieval processes in explaining the PC effect in Stroop-like tasks in a confounded setup where different processes compete with each, and they speak against explanations in terms of a global adjustment of cognitive control settings or contingency learning under these conditions. The results further support the assumption that the most recent episode in which a stimulus had occurred is crucial for responding in the current trial (the “law of recency”; Giesen et al., 2020). |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T14:38:54Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-6c4eac581f6542129d7ecd546d110308 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2514-4820 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T14:38:54Z |
| publishDate | 2022-06-01 |
| publisher | Ubiquity Press |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Cognition |
| spelling | doaj.art-6c4eac581f6542129d7ecd546d1103082022-12-22T02:42:58ZengUbiquity PressJournal of Cognition2514-48202022-06-015110.5334/joc.232249Accounting for Proportion Congruency Effects in the Stroop Task in a Confounded Setup: Retrieval of Stimulus-Response Episodes Explains it AllKlaus Rothermund0Nathalie Gollnick1Carina G. Giesen2Friedrich Schiller University Jena, JenaFriedrich Schiller University Jena, JenaFriedrich Schiller University Jena, JenaProportion congruency (PC) effects on the strength of distractor interference were investigated in a high-powered (n = 109), pre-registered experiment in which participants had to identify the ink color of color words. Replicating the standard PC effect, Stroop interference was larger in blocks comprising mostly congruent word-color combinations, compared to blocks comprising mostly incongruent trials. These block-level differences in the strength of the Stroop effect were eliminated after controlling for (a) the congruency of the most recent episode in which the current word had been presented (“episodic retrieval of control states”), and also after controlling for (b) the response relation of this episode and the current trial (“episodic response retrieval”). Controlling for the congruency in trial n-1 (congruency sequence effect, CSE), irrespective of word relation did not eliminate the PC effect, nor did controlling for immediate exact and partial repetitions. When predicting PC effects simultaneously by both types of episodic retrieval processes, only episodic response retrieval explained the effect. Our findings attest to the importance of episodic response retrieval processes in explaining the PC effect in Stroop-like tasks in a confounded setup where different processes compete with each, and they speak against explanations in terms of a global adjustment of cognitive control settings or contingency learning under these conditions. The results further support the assumption that the most recent episode in which a stimulus had occurred is crucial for responding in the current trial (the “law of recency”; Giesen et al., 2020).https://www.journalofcognition.org/articles/232stroop taskproportion congruency effectstimulusresponse bindingscognitive controlcontingency learningepisodic response retrievalepisodic retrieval of control stateslaw of recency |
| spellingShingle | Klaus Rothermund Nathalie Gollnick Carina G. Giesen Accounting for Proportion Congruency Effects in the Stroop Task in a Confounded Setup: Retrieval of Stimulus-Response Episodes Explains it All Journal of Cognition stroop task proportion congruency effect stimulusresponse bindings cognitive control contingency learning episodic response retrieval episodic retrieval of control states law of recency |
| title | Accounting for Proportion Congruency Effects in the Stroop Task in a Confounded Setup: Retrieval of Stimulus-Response Episodes Explains it All |
| title_full | Accounting for Proportion Congruency Effects in the Stroop Task in a Confounded Setup: Retrieval of Stimulus-Response Episodes Explains it All |
| title_fullStr | Accounting for Proportion Congruency Effects in the Stroop Task in a Confounded Setup: Retrieval of Stimulus-Response Episodes Explains it All |
| title_full_unstemmed | Accounting for Proportion Congruency Effects in the Stroop Task in a Confounded Setup: Retrieval of Stimulus-Response Episodes Explains it All |
| title_short | Accounting for Proportion Congruency Effects in the Stroop Task in a Confounded Setup: Retrieval of Stimulus-Response Episodes Explains it All |
| title_sort | accounting for proportion congruency effects in the stroop task in a confounded setup retrieval of stimulus response episodes explains it all |
| topic | stroop task proportion congruency effect stimulusresponse bindings cognitive control contingency learning episodic response retrieval episodic retrieval of control states law of recency |
| url | https://www.journalofcognition.org/articles/232 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT klausrothermund accountingforproportioncongruencyeffectsinthestrooptaskinaconfoundedsetupretrievalofstimulusresponseepisodesexplainsitall AT nathaliegollnick accountingforproportioncongruencyeffectsinthestrooptaskinaconfoundedsetupretrievalofstimulusresponseepisodesexplainsitall AT carinaggiesen accountingforproportioncongruencyeffectsinthestrooptaskinaconfoundedsetupretrievalofstimulusresponseepisodesexplainsitall |