Assessment of computerized Colour Stroop task through PEBL

Srijan Tandon

2030329

Department of Psychology

CHRIST (Deemed to be University)

PSY 351: Psychological Statistics and Experiments

Prof. Neeraj

August 24, 2021

Experiment number: 3

Date: 23-08-21

Introduction

The stroop effect refers to the difficulty that occurs in naming the colour with which any word

or name of a different colour is written, but does not occur when the name of colour written and font

colour used are the same (Stroop, 1935 as cited in Wright, 2017). It is a delay in reaction time due to a

discrepancy between stimuli. The discrepancy occurs due to incongruency, that is, when the meaning

of the word written and the font colour used are different; congruency occurs when they are the same

(Ruhl, 2020).

The Stroop Colour (and Word) test is one of the most popular and well-studied & replicated

neuropsychological tests and is used extensively to assess participants’ ability to inhibit cognitive

interference that occurs when the processing of a specific stimulus feature impedes the simultaneous

processing of another attribute of the same stimulus (Scarpina & Tagini, 2017). While performing the

test, subjects are required to name the colour in which the word (stimulus) is written, instead of

reading the word itself. In doing so, there is a delay in reaction time as it is much harder to name the

font colour when the word itself spells another colour name (incongruent stimulus) as compared to

when the colour name written and the font colour used are the same (congruent stimulus). The test

was developed by John Ridley Stroop in 1935 (Ruhl, 2020).

Multiple theoretical frameworks have provided different explanations for the phenomenon:

• Speed of processing theory: reading words occurs much faster than identifying and naming

colours as word processing is faster than colour processing. In dealing with incongruent

stimulus, we read the word first, making it more difficult to then name the colour (McMahon,

2013 as cited in Ruhl, 2020).

mental processes that are performed relatively quickly and require few cognitive resources.

This type of information processing generally occurs outside of conscious awareness and

usually occurs during tasks that are familiar and easy. This theory states that while reading

and understanding the meaning of words is automatic, recognition of colours is not, therefore,

there is a slight delay. Furthermore, although reading does not require much attention, it still

uses enough to slow down colour processing (Monahan, 2001 as cited in Ruhl, 2020).

• Selective attention theory: Identifying and naming colours requires more attention as

compared to reading words and thus, takes longer (McMahon, 2013, as cited in Ruhl, 2020).

• Parallel distributed processing: In repeatedly completing various tasks, the brain develops

unique and specific pathways. Some of these are stronger than others, such as reading vs

identifying colours (Cohen et al., 1990, as cited in Ruhl, 2020).

Top-down processing also explains the difficulty felt in performing the task as the subject

automatically recognize the word before being able to focus on and consider individual attributes

pertaining to the font.

From MRIs and fMRIs, two particularly valuable regions of the brain related to the stroop effect

have been discovered, that is, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLFPC) and anterior cingulate cortex

(ACC). The DLPFC helps memory and executive functioning, activates colour perception and inhibits

word meaning articulation. The ACC handles selection of appropriate response and proper allotment

of attentional resources. (Ruhl, 2020)

The stroop effect and test has been extended to other forms of interference as well like picture and

word, direction and word, digits and numerical processing and central and peripheral letter

identification (Ruhl, 2020).

Method

Aim
To test whether irrelevant stimuli interfere with the colour naming task. Plan Administer the

computerized Color Stroop task through PEBL to the participant. Purpose is to assess whether

processing of one stimulus feature is interfering with processing of other features of the same

stimulus. If there are no errors made in responding under different stimulus feature variant conditions,

then it indicates the participant’s ability to inhibit cognitive interference while processing a particular

stimulus feature.

Hypotheses

H₀1.There is no difference in the accuracy (or errors) made between three conditions of the colour

naming task

H₀2.There is no difference in the mean response time between three conditions of the colour naming

task

Materials

Colour Stroop Task on PEBL. The Stroop effect is named after John Ridley Stroop (Stroop. J R,

1935). This is one of the frequently used tests to measure selective attention capacity of the subject.

The Psychology Experiment Building Language (PEBL) version of the test is used in the current

experiment (Mueller & Piper, 2014). The task consists of three conditions where subjects are

expected to identify the colour of the words presented on the screen. Condition 1 Consistent (C). In

this condition the meaning of the words and colour of the words are the same. Condition 2

Inconsistent (I). In this condition the meaning of the words and colour of the words are different.

Condition 3 Neutral (N). In this condition, the meaning of the words is not related to any colours.

Procedure

Setting up & Arrangement

The participant is seated comfortably. Rapport has to be established. After the basic orientation to the

test, the participant will be asked to start the test.

The participant has been chosen based on convenience sampling.

Participant details

Name (initials): ST

Age: 19

Sex: M

Education: 2nd year UG

Process

Numbers 1 to 4 will be assigned to colours such as Red, Blue, Yellow and green. The

participant will be instructed to identify the colour of the word, presented on the screen for a few

milliseconds, by pressing the assigned number on the keypad. A few practice trials have to be given to

reduce the interference of response delay. After the practice trial, the participant will be asked to

continue the experiment. The three conditions have a total of 56 trials in each, including 8 practice

trials under each condition. Hence, there are a total of 24 practice trials, and 48 actual trials in each

condition.

Instructions

The following instructions are to be given to the participant. “You are about to take part in a

task in which you will be asked to determine the colour that written words appear in. Sometimes, the

words will be actual colour names. When this happens, try not to respond with the written colour

name, but only with the colour of the word with the 1-2-3-4 keys on the top of the keyboard. Colours

assigned to each number are: 1 = red 2 = blue 3 = green 4 = yellow. Kindly respond as fast as

possible.”

Debriefing
 Thank you for your participation in this experiment. Your data will be kept confidential and

will only be used for academic purposes. The purpose of this experiment was to see if irrelevant

stimuli interfere and create conflict with colour-naming abilities, when put under certain conditions.

Majority of people show the existence of the conflict. If you have any further queries regarding the

experiment, you can ask.

Controls/Precautions & Ethical Considerations

● Extraneous variables, like environmental distractions, participant anxiety etc. are controlled during

the test to the best of the ability of the experimenter.

● The participant is given some practice sessions to learn the number associated with colour.

● Participant is debriefed after the experiment.

Analysis

The data is captured on PEBL in terms of average response time and accuracy (number of

errors made). Three columns are to be considered from the PEBL excel data sheet for calculation - rt,

random-error and incongruence error. The ‘Cond’ column indicates the respective three conditions,

which are presented in random order. The effect of the irrelevant stimuli on colour naming is

calculated based on average response time and accuracy. Mean response time has to be calculated

separately for each condition under actual trials, and accuracy of response is expressed through the

total number of errors made as random and incongruence error. Mean accuracy is calculated by

computing the statistical mean of all the errors across all actual trials, separately for each condition.

Results and Discussion

Table 1

Summary table of Mean response time and mean accuracy across Consistent, Inconsistent

and Neutral Stimulus conditions

ST Congruent 1 557.188 0.979

Incongruent 5 659.729 0.896

Neutral/Random 1 567.625 0.979

The test was conducted to assess whether irrelevant or conflicting stimuli would interfere with

identification of font colour used. The test was administered on a 19-year-old male pursuing their

second BA undergraduate year. The subject made 5 errors for incongruent stimuli with a mean

accuracy of ‘0.896’ as compared to 1 each for congruent and neutral condition and mean accuracy

‘0.979’. Furthermore, the mean response time was much lower for the incongruent condition than the

other conditions. Mean response time for congruent stimuli was only slightly better than neutral

stimuli (10 milliseconds).

Introspective report

I performed the test in a well lit and quiet room. I attempted to answer as quickly as possible and

sometimes pressed the wrong answer key due to this. Due to the length of the test, sometimes my

attention wandered off and I took too long to answer and would end up clicking the wrong option.

Conclusion

Both hypotheses have been disproved as an increase in reaction time and errors occurs due to

incongruency in the name of the colour written and the font colour with which it was written.
 References

Mueller, S. T., & Piper, B. J. (2014). The psychology experiment building language (PEBL) and PEBL

test battery. Journal of neuroscience methods, 222, 250-259.

Ruhl , C. (2020, Dec 01). The stroop effect. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/stroop-

effect.html

Scarpina, F., & Tagini, S. (2017). The Stroop Color and Word Test. Frontiers in psychology, 8, 557.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00557

Stroop, John Ridley (1935). Studies of Interference in Serial Verbal Reactions. Journal of Experimental

Psychology,. 18 (6),: 643–662.

Wright B. C. (2017). What Stroop tasks can tell us about selective attention from childhood to adulthood.

British journal of psychology, 108(3), 583–607. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12230