Stroop Test Experiment
This research aimed to investigate the stroop effect, and to see the interference stroop has in the reaction time of a task. An opportunity sample of 20 people (10 males and 10 females aged between 16 and 60) were chosen to complete the stroop test where they had to read a set of (experimental and control) coloured words. It was expected that the experimental list of words would take longer to complete. The results showed that experimental list of words took a significantly longer time to complete.
The calculated related T test found the T value= 9.
52 which exceeded the critical value of 1. 729 at p<0. 05% which means the results are significant. INTRODUCTION The Stroop effect is an area of cognitive psychology. It is a demonstration of interference in the reaction time of a task. When a word such as blue, green, red, etc. is printed in a color differing from the words semantic meaning (e. g. the word “red” printed in blue ink), a delay occurs in the identifying the words color leading to an increase in mistakes.
Ridley Stroop administered several variations of two main tests.
Stroop referred to his tests as RCN, to stand for “Reading Color Names”, where participants were required to repeat the written meaning of words with differing colored fonts, and NCW, to stand for “Naming Colored Words”, in which participants were asked to orally identify the color of each printed color name. Stroop identified a large increase on the time taken by participants to complete the NCW tasks, an effect still occurred despite continued practice at each task.
There are two theories that may explain the stroop effect. These are:
Speed of processing Theory: (Appendix A) > Selective Attention Theory: (Appendix B) Since the development of the Stroop task, it has utilized the Stroop effect to investigate aspects of such varied psychological disorders as ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder), Schizophrenia, and Anorexia. EEG and fMRI studies of the Stroop effect have revealed selective activation of the anterior cingulate cortex during a stroop task, a prefrontal structure in the brain which is hypothesized to be responsible for conflict monitoring. HYPOTHESES AIM:
The aim of this experiment is to test the stroop effect by investigating whether the time taken to identify the names of colours differs if the colour of the word matches the ink used to spell the word or if it is written in a contradicting coloured ink. HYPOTHESIS: If the color the word is written in matches the word, it will be identified more quickly than if the color the word is written in is contradictory. NULL HYPOTHESIS: There will be no significant difference in the time taken to read colored words written in the same colored ink and the name of colors written in different colored ink.
METHODOLOGY METHOD: A one tailed lab experiment (Appendix C). DESIGN: A repeated measures design as each of the participants will take part in all conditions of the independent variable (Appendix D). PARTICIPANTS: 20 people, 10 male and 10 female between the ages 16-60 from a Surrey Sixth form using an opportunity sample (Appendix E). The sample was approached in and around the sixth form block, including the common room, study room and sixth form canteen.
MATERIALS:
The stroop experimental list is a word list in which each word is a colour name, but always written in a different ink colour. For example, blue would be written in red ink and red would be written in yellow ink. There will also be a control, where the words will match the ink colour that they are written in. PROCEDURE: Participants were approached throughout Monday 23rd June 2008, in the Sixth Form Block at School. They were asked to take part in an investigation experimenting the stroop effect (Appendix F).
Upon agreeing to participate, they were taken to an empty room where they were given a briefing (Appendix G). They were also informed that the experiment was anonymous (Appendix H). They were then given the (experimental) list of words (Appendix I). The time taken to do this was measured and recorded. The participant was then given the second (control) list of words (Appendix J). Again the time taken to do this was measured and then recorded. Once both sets of words were completed they were debriefed (Appendix K).
