The Stroop experiment can be traced back as far as the nineteen century around the time of some particular works of Cattell and Wundt. The experiment was first written about in 1929 in German. The experiment was name after John Ridley Stroop after he had written the article “Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions,” which was published in 1935.there have been over 700 replications of this experiment
The experiment is a demonstration of reaction time of a task . The Stroop experiment employs two basic processes of cognition; attention (“the concentration of mental effort on sensory or mental events”) and automaticity (“a cognitive process that does not require conscious thought as a result of existing cognitive structures or highly practiced tasks.”). The Stroop Effect is all about being able to say the colour of the word and not the colour the word are saying. For example, the word “red” is portraying the colour green so instead of saying the colour is red you say green. It said that it is easier to make out the colour when it is the same as the word “red” (congruent) than saying the colour of the word when the word has a different color than it is portraying “blue” (incongruent). In this case it is that inference is taking place.
Upon choosing an experiment to do, one stumbled upon of the experiment of the Stroop Effect under the categories of attention and automaticity. It created an intrigue in one, which caused one to choose it as his or her experiment. Firstly, after clicking on the experiment, one had to choose the setting that best suited him or her. One chose to do two trials of the experiment. The first trial one chose to have the condition to be congruent words, the colour of the words to be red,...
... middle of paper ...
...colours are read at a slower rate when they do not match with words with a different colour. Also, they stated what causes the actual interference is when two responses are competing for responses that should be produced. All in all, this can affect the reading reaction time. In some cases the reaction time can be as perfect. That is when it only has congruent word, and sometimes it may not be so perfect because of interference. This can be caused by incongruent words.
Reference
Maclin, M.K, Maclin, O.H, Soslo, R.L (2008).Cognitive Psychology (8th ed). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
Schwartz, D (2003). The Stroop Effect. Retrieved November 12, 2009 from: http://www.psych.wright.edu/gilk-classes/Psy300_F03/stroop1.pdf
Wikipedia. (2009). The Stroop Effect. Retrieved November 12, 2009 from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroop_effect#Original_experiment
When and why do you think the subject in the experiment began to "second guess" himself?
... no idea that the experiment was about their reactions. In Zimbardo’s the subjects knew of the simulation that would be taking place. In the end both cases proved that as Samucha explains Milgram and Zimbardo’s work demonstrates that, sometimes, the power of situations can be overpowering.
In 1963, Stanley Milgram conducted an experiment that was one of the most controversial of his time, and of ours. “The subjects—or ‘teachers’—were instructed to administer [electroshocks] to a human ‘learner,’ with the shocks becoming progressively more powerful and painful” (Collins, para. 1, Book Overview). The subjects watched as the “learner” was strapped into a chair. When the experimenter asked if either of the two had a question, the “learner” mentioned he had a heart problem. The “teacher” heard this, as well, and still continued to go through with the experiment. told that they were to read a series of paired words, and “learners”
His experiment consisted on observing the different reaction times on a number of identifying processes, based on the interference demonstrated on the Stroop experiment (Windes 1968). Unlike the color identification in the Stroop experiment, this experiment resembles more to the experiment conducted in class, as it matched short words with number. The experiment yield results that expressed a faster reaction times to the words. This experiment showed that the effect observed in Stroop does not belong only to color identification but other features, like small words and
The experiment began with Milgram placing an advertisement in the local newspaper to recruit volunteers for his experiment. The experiment began with the introduction of the other participant, the other participant being an ally of Milgram’s. Afterwards, each participant would draw straws to decide which role they would take up, the “teacher” or the “learner.” However, the decision was always fixed so that the participant would always end up being the teacher. The learner would then be strapped to an electric chair by the teacher and would have a list of words read to him to be
...all, the lack of general knowledge of the non-words made the experiment a cumbersome process, especially during the experiment’s incipient stage. However, the process was worthwhile as I experienced firsthand the dissociation of learning and memory.
...experiment, felt that the experiment made such a deep impression on him that he became convinced that “social sciences and psychology, are much more important in today’s world.'; One can only imagine the inner conflicts that were running through his head. After the experiment, he described the mood, “I did want to stop at that time. I turned around and looked at [the experimenter]. I guess it’s a matter of…authority.';
A popular subject within psychology is that of selective attention, particularly visual, auditory or visual and auditory attention (Driver, 2001). There are many theories of visual and auditory attention that provide us with a greater understanding of the ways in which humans attend to different stimuli (Driver, 2001), such as Broadbent’s (1958) filter theory of attention, for example. This essay will compare and contrast theories of visual and auditory attention, as well as discussing how well these theories explain how we attend to objects. The essay will consist of three auditory attention theories of Broadbent’s filter theory, Treisman’s (1964) attenuation theory, and Deutsch and Deutsch’s (1963) late selection model of attention; and two models of visual attention known as the spotlight model, such as Treisman and Gelade’s (1980) feature integration model, and the zoom-lens model of visual attention (see Styles, 2006). Broadbent’s (1958) filter theory of attention proposes that there is a filter device between sensory identification and short-term memory.
However, there as several problems which hinders the reading process, one of them being ‘tunnel vision’. This is a condition experienced by most readers especially beginners. This is because they lack ‘non visual information’ when trying to digest certain texts. Non visual information is what is stored in the brain, prior knowledge or specific information which will enable the brain to associate with whatever is received through the eyes thus bringing comprehension to the reader’s mind when reading a text. The inability of the brain to use this information due the over-load of visual information, will cause it to take more time to make decisions on what are seen. For example, a student unfamiliar with certain words in a purposely distorted text may have to take a few seconds longer to recognize them rather than familiar words which only require a single glance.
The original baseline experiment (Milgram, 1963), took place at Yale University, with 40 participants. Each participant would arrive at the laboratory to meet the confederate (whom they thought was another participant). In the laboratory room there was a ‘shock generator’, presented as a machine that could deliver a graduated amount of shocks, increasing by 15-volt intervals, with a maximum of 450 volts. In fact, it could only administer 45 volts, and this was administered to the participant, to convince them the machine was real. The participant (who was the teacher) and the experimenter were in a separate room from the learner, with the participant asking the learner simple word-pairing que...
Watson and his team opened the experiment by questioning if a loud noise would cause a fear reaction. A hammer struck against a steel bar was an abrupt sound causing Albert to throw his hands in the air. By the third and last strike, the child was crying; this was the first time an emotive state (in the lab) produced fear, causing Albert to cry. The sound conditioning led to Watson and his team questioning whether they could condition an emotion while presenting a white rat to the child at the same time they strike the steel bar.
The experiments were quite simple, in that there was a seemingly harmless task to be performed, and the participants were instructed to choose the estimation of the lengths of a line when compared to two ...
They first proposed this model in 1947 after they had studied the Atkinson-Shiffrin model (McLeod, S. A. 2012). One piece of evidence found for this model's existence is the span-test. The span-test is a test where individuals are to repeat a set of letters. After every representation back to the presenter, another letter is added making the sting of letters longer. Typically once people reach 7 or 8 letters in length they begin to mix up letters and make mistakes (Cognition, p. 16). Sometimes people will replace letters with other letters that sound similar, such as the letters “e” and “b”. When people first take this test they subconsciously store the letters in the articulatory rehearsal loop and in the central executive. If the participant were to repeat this span test but this time maintaining a hum noise or repeating one word over and over again. They would have a more difficult time remembering and restating the group of letters back. When your brain is multitasking in this way the articulatory rehearsal loop is not available to store information, since it’s internal path is broken up by the word being spoken or noise being made from the
Although there was some criticisms about the above experiment, Craik and Tulving performed more experiments each time refining the D.O.P. model. There were thoughts that the structural tasks were easier and not as much time had to be spent on them therefore people did not have as long to look at those words and could not study them like the other tasks. Craik and Tulving then made the structural task take equally as long as the other tasks. The results remand the same as the previous experiments. Craik and Tulving also originally started with five tasks, but then narrowed it down to three to avoid a ceiling effect. The self-referent task was later added to model by Rogers.
Wise (2014), discusses that within the twenty first century in which the efficient completion of tasks is essential, speed reading is extremely advantageous. Not only does speed reading allow for the quicker acquisition of knowledge, it has shown to influence the brains functionality. Thus, one displays enhanced memory abilities, a higher level of attention and focus as well as a heightened problem solving ability (Wise, 2014). Despite the advantages of an increased reading speed, there is a large and significant disadvantage (Bell, 2001). The danger of developing a rapid reading rate, is that one’s level of comprehension is severely compromised. Therefore, a speed reader would not acquire an adequate amount of information when reading swiftly. It is possible that this disadvantage will have a detrimental effect on the precise completion of various academic and recreational tasks (Bell,