An experimental study of a variation of the Stroop Effect: the interaction of an automatic and controlled process and attentional processes on a colour identification task. Abstract Theories suggest that selective attention allows for only one channel of input to be semantically analysed, whilst other information is discarded. It has been stated that much of this is unconscious and automatic; and that these over learned, automatic processes can intrude on a colour identification task. This was examined in a variation of the Stroop Effect test [you need to briefly state what was actually done in the study] and results showed that ink colour identification was slower for a list of colour names than when neutral words were used. This supports that the unconscious semantic processing of words on an unattended channel was intruding upon a task of naming ink colours.
The results of my IAT concluded that I have a moderate automatic preference for light skin compared to dark skin. While taking the test, I knew the response that I wanted to put but because of the switching around I would accidently press the wrong letter. I guess in my mind I was trying to move fast while keeping up with the constant change. I feel as though the test should've given a little to no preference result for me. My impression of the IAT is that it may be accurate, but it really depends on the person taking it.
An experiment investigating the Stroop effect on color-related words. 1/2 The stroop effect interference is defined as the difference in time to name the ink colors of printed color words compared to neutral color words. This experiment aimed to verify if the stroop effect interference still occurred when a variation was introduced and color-related words were used instead of color words. Participants were given one list of color-related words written in incongruent ink colors and another list of color neutral words. Participants were then asked to name the ink color and their response times for each list were measured in seconds.
Then the second list of words, which are words not corresponded with the colour and is the controlled process, these are read aloud with the errors and the time taken recorded and compared to the first set of data. These results can prove the hypothesis was supported and that controlled processes are more prone to thinking rather than just doing This experiment has had the aim of testing the effects of automatic and controlled processes in the Stroop effect. The Stroop effect demonstrates performing a controlled process task compared to an automatic process task and outlines the extended time taken to complete the task. An automatic process is a task or process that doesn’t involve much attention or effort to be performed. A controlled process does require undivided attention and an amount of mental effort is usually needed.
As Brown and Warner (1915) have pointed out, the difference in speed in reading names of colours and in naming colours may be accounted for the difference in experience called the "automatic word recognition hypothesis" or, as others have claimed, certain mental activities happen automatically even when not consciously stimulated by the subject. This phenomenon is due to the Stroop effect, and the following experiment aim to induce that same effect into the participants and observe the difference between reading the congruent and incongruent words. Twelve participants took part in the experiment. The data collected was analysed using the Inferential Statistical tests method, because this method enable us to assume that the whole population may behave in the same way as the participants in this experiment. The t-test value has been calculated and is found to be equal to 10.48.
Eight participants volunteered to participate in this experiment. Participants were handed two sheets of paper for the purpose of reading them individually and were timed for each individual sheet. The participants were instructed to read the sheets as expeditiously and accurately as possible, ignoring the written word, naming the colour and correct any errors made during the process. The contrast in time for reading the two sheets was recorded to show the level of interference between them. The results suggest that participants took shorter time to read the nonsense words than that of reading the incongruent words.
The Stroop Effect Introduction- Background of investigation Stroop (1935) carried out an investigation into autonomic processing, by inventing the stroop effect.In this, he instructed participants to read a list of colour words written in black ink. This, evidently a very simple task was easy for the participants to carry out. The aim of this experiment is to discover whether people are able to read the word that is placed in a different colour than what is said. The hypothesis is the length of time taken for participants read the words out. IV is the factor that was manipulated by the researcher in the study.
Unlike in a field experiment where the participants are completely unaware that they are being observed so it gives more of a natural response, this allows the researchers to gain results with greater validity. In a laboratory experiment, the researchers have to tell the percipients the reasons for the experiment to allow the percipients to give full consent this is due to the ethical reasons such as if the person doesn’t agree due to religion/beliefs, ethnicity ect. Where as, the percipients of a field experiment have to be unaware of the reasons for the research to allow a higher rate of natural answers. This means that field experiments are less ethically agreed with. An example of a laboratory experiment is Asch (a psychologist) who tested the rate of conformity within groups.
Human beings trust their own senses. However sometimes our senses can be wrong. Even if science has the proof that our senses are incorrect, the human mind will find it impossible to believe. Let us take the example of the chessboard optical illusion (see picture 1). Directly our senses will lead us to believe that block A is darker then block B.
If we judge and label someone by appearance, we probably can’t learn special characteristics about someone because we don’t know about their belief and personality in appearance. Some people just hide their emotion and seldom express themselves by a verbal communication. Therefore, the “Squiggling game” is a good form of communication to allow us to know someone without judgment more. 250 words Additional material: Gordon Allport Prejudice jeopardizes to learn special characteristics about someone. As a result, we should find different ways to reduce prejudice.