Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Advances in Human-Computer Interaction
Volume 2010, Article ID 852420, 10 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2010/852420
Research Article

Stroop Interference and Facilitation Effects in Kinesthetic and Haptic Tasks

The Touch Laboratory, Department of Education in Technology and Science, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa 32000, Israel

Received 21 May 2009; Accepted 5 January 2010

Academic Editor: Caroline G. L. Cao

Copyright © 2010 David Hecht and Miriam Reiner. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. J. R. Stroop, “Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions,” Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 643–662, 1935. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. G. S. Klein, “Semantic power measured through the interference of words with color-naming,” American Journal of Psychology, vol. 77, pp. 576–588, 1964. View at Google Scholar
  3. E. C. Dalrymple-Alford and B. Budayer, “Examination of some aspects of the Stroop Color-Word Test,” Perceptual & Motor Skills, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 1211–1214, 1966. View at Google Scholar
  4. E. C. Darlymple-Alford, “Associative facilitation and interference in the Stroop color-word task,” Perception and Psychophysics, vol. 11, pp. 274–276, 1972. View at Google Scholar
  5. C. M. MacLeod, “Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review,” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 109, no. 2, pp. 163–203, 1991. View at Google Scholar
  6. C. M. MacLeod and P. A. MacDonald, “Interdimensional interference in the Stroop effect: uncovering the cognitive and neural anatomy of attention,” Trends in Cognitive Sciences, vol. 4, no. 10, pp. 383–391, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. J. D. Windes, “Reaction time for numerical coding and naming of numerals,” Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol. 78, no. 2, pp. 318–322, 1968. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. U. Hentschel, “Two new interference tests compared to the Stroop Color-Word Test,” Psychological Research Bulletin, Lund University, vol. 13, pp. 1–24, 1974. View at Google Scholar
  9. S. R. Palef and D. R. Olson, “Spatial and verbal rivalry in a Stroop-like task,” Canadian Journal of Psychology, vol. 29, pp. 201–209, 1975. View at Google Scholar
  10. H. H. Clark and H. H. Brownell, “Judging up and down,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 339–352, 1975. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. P. M. Beall and A. M. Herbert, “A Stroop analog task: words versus facial expressions,” Journal of Vision, vol. 1, no. 3, p. 279a, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. O. Rubinsten and A. Henik, “Is an ant larger than a lion?” Acta Psychologica, vol. 111, no. 1, pp. 141–154, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. R. A. Zwaan and R. H. Yaxley, “Spatial iconicity affects semantic relatedness judgments,” Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 954–958, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. J. M. Pieters, “Ear asymmetry in an auditory spatial Stroop task as a function of handedness,” Cortex, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 369–379, 1981. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. E. J. Green and P. J. Barber, “An auditory Stroop effect with judgements of speaker gender,” Perception and Psychophysics, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 459–466, 1981. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. E. J. Green and P. J. Barber, “Interference effects in an auditory Stroop task: congruence and correspondence,” Acta Psychologica, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 183–194, 1983. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. L. McClain, “Stimulus-response compatibility affects auditory Stroop interference,” Perception and Psychophysics, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 266–270, 1983. View at Google Scholar
  18. K. Miyazaki, “The auditory Stroop interference and the irrelevant speech/pitch effect: absolute-pitch listeners can't suppress pitch labeling,” in Proceedings of the 18th International Congress on Acoustics, Kyoto, Japan, 2004.
  19. P. Walker and S. Smith, “Stroop interference based on the synaesthetic qualities of auditory pitch,” Perception, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 75–81, 1984. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. J. A. Gottfried and R. J. Dolan, “The nose smells what the eye sees: crossmodal visual facilitation of human olfactory perception,” Neuron, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 375–386, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. P. Pauli, L. E. Bourne Jr., H. Diekmann, and N. Birbaumer, “Cross-modality priming between odors and odor-congruent words,” American Journal of Psychology, vol. 112, no. 2, pp. 175–186, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. G. Beeli, M. Esslen, and L. Jäncke, “Synaesthesia: when coloured sounds taste sweet,” Nature, vol. 434, no. 7029, p. 38, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  23. E. M. Elliott, N. Cowan, and F. Valle-Inclan, “The nature of cross-modal color-word interference effects,” Perception and Psychophysics, vol. 60, no. 5, pp. 761–767, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. E. M. Elliott and N. Cowan, “Habituation to auditory distractors in a cross-modal, color—word interference task,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 654–667, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. J. B. Hanauer and P. J. Brooks, “Developmental change in the cross-modal Stroop effect,” Perception and Psychophysics, vol. 65, no. 3, pp. 359–366, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. H. Shimada, “Effect of auditory presentation of words on color naming: the intermodal Stroop effect,” Perceptual & Motor Skills, vol. 70, no. 3, pp. 1155–1161, 1990. View at Google Scholar
  27. A. Roelofs, “The visual-auditory color-word Stroop asymmetry and its time course,” Memory and Cognition, vol. 33, no. 8, pp. 1325–1336, 2005. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. M. F. Damian and R. C. Martin, “Semantic and phonological codes interact in single word production,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 345–361, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. S. R. H. Langton, C. O'Malley, and V. Bruce, “Actions speak no louder than words: symmetrical cross-modal interference effects in the processing of verbal and gestural information,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 1357–1375, 1996. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. S. R. H. Langton, “The mutual influence of gaze and head orientation in the analysis of social attention direction,” The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 825–845, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. D. M. Stuart and M. Carrasco, “Semantic component of a cross-modal Stroop-like task,” American Journal of Psychology, vol. 106, no. 3, pp. 383–405, 1993. View at Google Scholar
  32. J. J. Gibson, The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, Mass, USA, 1966.
  33. Y. Hatwell, “Touch and cognition,” in Touching for Knowing: Cognitive Psychology of Haptic Manual Perception, Y. Hatwell, A. Streri, and E. Gentaz, Eds., John Benjamins, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2003. View at Google Scholar
  34. S. J. Lederman and R. L. Klatzky, “Action for perception: manual exploratory movements for haptically processing objects and their features,” in Hand and Brain: The Neurophysiology and Psychology of Hand Movements, A. M. Wing, P. Haggard, and J. R. Flanagan, Eds., pp. 434–446, Academic Press, New York, NY, USA, 1996. View at Google Scholar
  35. R. L. Klatzky and S. J. Lederman, “Touch,” in Handbook of Psychology, Experimental Psychology, A. F. Healy, A. F. Proctor, and I. B. Weiner, Eds., vol. 4, pp. 147–176, Wiley, New York, NY, USA, 2003. View at Google Scholar
  36. M. Hershenson, “Reaction time as a measure of intersensory facilitation,” Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 289–293, 1962. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. A. Diederich and H. Colonius, “Bimodal and trimodal multisensory enhancement: effects of stimulus onset and intensity on reaction time,” Perception and Psychophysics, vol. 66, no. 8, pp. 1388–1404, 2004. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. B. Forster, C. Cavina-Pratesi, S. M. Aglioti, and G. Berlucchi, “Redundant target effect and intersensory facilitation from visual-tactile interactions in simple reaction time,” Experimental Brain Research, vol. 143, no. 4, pp. 480–487, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  39. D. Hecht, M. Reiner, and A. Karni, “Enhancement of response times to bi- and tri-modal sensory stimuli during active movements,” Experimental Brain Research, vol. 185, no. 4, pp. 655–665, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  40. D. Hecht, M. Reiner, and A. Karni, “Multisensory enhancement: gains in choice and in simple response times,” Experimental Brain Research, vol. 189, no. 2, pp. 133–143, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  41. P. J. Laurienti, R. A. Kraft, J. A. Maldjian, J. H. Burdette, and M. T. Wallace, “Semantic congruence is a critical factor in multisensory behavioral performance,” Experimental Brain Research, vol. 158, no. 4, pp. 405–414, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  42. P. Walker and S. Smith, “Stroop interference based on the multimodal correlates of haptic size and auditory pitch,” Perception, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 729–736, 1985. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. J. R. Simon, “Reactions toward the source of stimulation,” Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol. 81, no. 1, pp. 174–176, 1969. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. T. Egner, M. Delano, and J. Hirsch, “Separate conflict-specific cognitive control mechanisms in the human brain,” NeuroImage, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 940–948, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  45. S. Kornblum, “Dimensional overlap and dimensional relevance in stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus compatibility,” in Tutorials in Motor Behavior, G. Stelmach and J. Requin, Eds., vol. 2, pp. 743–777, North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1992. View at Google Scholar
  46. X. Liu, M. T. Banich, B. L. Jacobson, and J. L. Tanabe, “Common and distinct neural substrates of attentional control in an integrated Simon and spatial Stroop task as assessed by event-related fMRI,” NeuroImage, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 1097–1106, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus
  47. C. H. Lu and R. W. Proctor, “The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: a review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects,” Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, vol. 2, pp. 174–207, 1995. View at Google Scholar
  48. J. R. Simon and K. Berbaum, “Effect of conflicting cues on information processing: the ‘Stroop effect’ vs. the ‘Simon effect’,” Acta Psychologica, vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 159–170, 1990. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. D. Hecht and M. Reiner, “Sensory dominance in combinations of audio, visual and haptic stimuli,” Experimental Brain Research, vol. 193, no. 2, pp. 307–314, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed · View at Scopus