Introduction
The phenomenon of the Stroop effect is explained in different ways by different researchers. A number of theories are commonly adhered to, which are far from being mutually exclusive (Raz et al., 2006; Erdodi et al., 2018; Daniel & Kapoula, 2019). The main theories of automaticity, selective attention, and parallel or speed processing can be distinguished in the studied literature (Zeng et al., 2020; Song et al., 2018). The theory of automaticity emphasizes the participation minimization of the active part of conscious thinking in the reading process. Selective attention implies prioritizing the essence of what is read over the appearance of the text (Sand & Nilsson, 2017; Kondo et al., 2021). It causes the reason to think about the narrowness and selectivity of cognitive perception. Moreover, according to the Sanborn and Harris (2019), the central role is played by the speed of processing the information received, which is higher for the meaning of the text.
Parallel processing, like selective attention, is determined by the priority of incoming information. It implies the possibility of influencing the sequence in order to increase the importance of the parallel task (Liu et al., 2020; Coghe et al., 2018). It is traditionally accepted that the cognitive performance of women and men is different (Willingham & Riener, 2019). Thus, men usually demonstrate a more technical and mathematical way of thinking and have higher working and spatial memory operation rates. On the other hand, women are distinguished by their speed of perception, accuracy and fluency, fine motor skills, and shorter response time. In addition, women are more sensorial developed and have a pronounced heightened emotionality. Much of the above can be witnessed with the Stroop test, which was done with the help of the study.
Rationale
The purpose of the study was to confirm the existence of a sustained Stroop effect on a specific sample of undergraduates. It was likewise of great interest to determine the persistence of this phenomenon. Furthermore, with the help of research, it was planned to investigate the peculiarities of this phenomenon manifestation in representatives of different genders and to identify or refute the peculiarities of the groups’ thinking.
Hypotheses
- The Stroop effect is evident, persistent, and follows standard patterns described by other researchers on other groups.
- The response rate of female participants is higher than that of male participants, while the percentage of correct answers and, consequently, concentration is significantly lower for women than for men.
- Based on the first and second hypotheses, selective attention is the most evident Stroop effect theory.
- Non-binary personas can combine the best cognitive performance of female- and male-specific thinking.
Prediction
Despite the relatively small sample, it was possible to predict the confirmation of all four hypotheses even before the detailed analysis. However, the result of the fourth one could be considered negligible, as two non-binary participants in the sample were insufficient for a confident confirmation, which confirms the null hypothesis for the current item.
Methods
Methods refer to the specifics of using different tools and types of research to conduct the analysis (Galvan & Pyrczak, 2020). Initially, the structure of the study was determined, a group of participants was selected, and a digital way of obtaining information was chosen (Huckin, 2019). After that, the different components of the study were lined up in the necessary clear and logical way to produce a result.
Research Design
A combined experimental-correlational design was chosen as the primary research design. The point in combining two similar but not identical methods is that more is needed to investigate and understand the effects of the independent values on the dependent ones (Emek Savaş et al., 2020). In addition, equivalent variables must be compared to determine the relationship between a participant’s gender and his or her thinking performance. The independent variables in this study are the number, gender, and age of the participants. The dependent variables are the group averages for congruent and incongruent decision efficacy and the corresponding reaction rate. Furthermore, the dependent variables are the difference in the number of participants of different genders and the difference in the mean values of the four main dependent variables.
Participants
A group of young adults, predominantly 19-22 years old, was chosen as participants in the study. Only three of the total sample of 53 were over the age of 37, which allows us to define the overall mean age of the group as 22.052 years. People were recruited relatively randomly, mostly undergraduates presented anonymously. The sample included 34 females, 17 males, and 2 non-binary individuals.
Materials
Participants were given a standardized Stroop test in electronic format as an assignment. The PsyToolkit (n.d.) instrument site was used: Web. Each participant was asked to read the instructions, which included hotkeys, and begin the test. The process itself involves the appearance of one of four words in free order: red, blue, green, and yellow. Each of these words has a monochrome font color of one of these same four colors, which the participant is asked to determine by pressing the appropriate key. The reaction time is a little over a second, and the test consists of 40 words (Fig. 1). As a result, the subject receives a calculated individual average of the congruent and incongruent values, which have been entered into the data set.
Procedure
Participants took the test on their personal computers and sent the results remotely for further information. After checking that all data were available, it was verified that all fields were complete and that information from all 53 subjects was available. Further, Microsoft Excel software was used for saving and basic statistical processing. Google Colab and Python were then used to perform statistical analysis and derive variables.
Histograms were plotted to visualize the distribution of congruent (Fig. 2) and incongruent (Fig. 3) response time values, as well as congruent (Fig. 4) and incongruent (Fig. 5) accuracy factors. Standard deviations and mean values were then calculated for each of the results columns and separately, considering the gender affiliation variable. After that, the variance and central tendency measures were determined graphically, and z-scores were calculated to develop a way to compare the specific participant to the whole sample.
Results
The results were interpreted for each of the hypotheses presented earlier. The first hypothesis is confirmed because similar patterns of variance and central tendency formation are observed in the random sample (Fig. 6-9), as in many other studies (Willingham & Riener, 2019). The Stroop test phenomenon is observed with similar variance and mean values.
The standard deviations are: for congruent accuracy 0.19, incongruent 0.17; for response time in the congruent case 182.35 ms, in the incongruent 183.29 ms. The average congruent accuracy factor of 0.917 exceeds the incongruent 0.886 by 0.031, or 3.4%. It displays a general trend toward a more efficient perception of congruent tasks. In turn, the average incongruent response time of 903.67 ms exceeds the congruent 830.83 ms by 72.84 ms, or 8.1%, which confirms the same.
Concerning the second hypothesis, the congruent average accuracy coefficient for males is 0.977 and significantly higher than for females: 0.885, with a delta of 9.5%. The difference in the incongruent accuracy rate is likewise 0.094, or 11%, in favor of men. The women’s average congruent response time of 824.57 ms is 27.41 ms lower than the men’s 851.99 ms, or 3.2%; the incongruent likewise exhibits a minimal delta of 1.06 ms difference.
According to additional studies, participant number 4678 had higher accuracy than 41.7% of the sample in congruent questions and higher than 63.7% of the sample in incongruent questions.
Discussion
The study’s main goal was to prove the existence of the Stroop effect and its ability to shade disadvantages and advantages inherent in different genders. The difference between congruent and incongruent scores can be seen with the naked eye, which confirms the existence of the Stroop effect even in a random sample. The findings again partially support the widespread theory about the potential psychological propensity of men to make more balanced conclusions and accurate responses. Moreover, the second hypothesis is likewise supported in terms of women’s superiority in the field of reaction speed and fine motor skills.
As for the selective attention hypothesis, there is only the possibility of a general analysis based not on the indicators themselves but on empirical observations. Together with the participants’ feedback, which was not considered in the statistical analysis but was confirmed by the opinions of the researchers, the confirmation of this theorem can be considered the most logical (Chen et al., 2019). In this case, the brain at work is similar to the computer’s primary processor core, which achieves multitasking not by simultaneous processing of different threads but by alternating switching between the leading tasks cyclically.
The proof can be found in the view that each congruent step in a test concentrates attention on itself and increases the response time to the next incongruent step, as well as increasing the probability of error in the next step. The same statement is likewise true in the opposite direction (Chen et al., 2019). To underline this conclusion, additional research with more data and more information on each step of each participant is recommended. Equally, there needs to be more literature that addresses this particular issue rather than a generalized theory of the phenomenon or, conversely, very narrow orientations. In addition, the unsupported hypothesis of a potential advantage of non-binary personalities in this test requires a separate study with a validated, relevant sample. Undoubtedly, the anonymity of the participants should be guaranteed to increase the accuracy of the final result by increasing the trust among people who potentially consider themselves non-binary non-publicly.
Reflection
The Stroop effect is interesting enough because its connection with the level of intelligence of the test taker is not apparent. Speed of reaction and the ability to switch attention is of the most significant importance, as well as concentration (Parsons et al., 2019). From personal experience, it is possible to assert that the next question has a higher probability of error and a longer response time when color and word match. Methods of dealing with this consist of concentration and attention training or in ways that are not entirely honest.
An example of this would be focusing solely on the keys responsible for the answers. The words themselves remain on the periphery of vision, and only the color, without slowing down, the response is processed by the brain. This option, or the use of words in an unfamiliar language, invalidates the meaning and sense of the experiment itself but is not mentioned by chance. The popular method of quickly completing a test with a good score by a dishonest participant can harm all research based on computerized tests of this format.
The parsing of methodology and statistics carried out in the course of this study has the benefit of increasing experience and skill with sources, information, and data analysis. The multitude of additional topics, partly touched upon in the process of creating the paper, drew attention to the need for a unified understanding and opinion about the Stroop effect among all researchers. The multitude of theories and different approaches signaled the need for further research.
References
Chen, K., Huang, L., Lin, B., Zhou, Y., Zhao, Q., & Guo, Q. (2019). The number of items on each Stroop test card is unrelated to its sensitivity. Neuropsychobiology, 77(1), 38–44. Web.
Coghe, G., Pilloni, G., Zucca, E., Porta, M., Corona, F., Frau, J., Fenu, G., Lorefice, L., Marrosu, M. G., Pau, M., & Cocco, E. (2018). Exploring cognitive motor interference in multiple sclerosis by the visual Stroop test. Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders, 22, 8–11. Web.
Daniel, F., & Kapoula, Z. (2019). Induced vergence-accommodation conflict reduces cognitive performance in the Stroop test. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 1247. Web.
Emek Savaş, D. D., Yerlikaya, D., G Yener, G., & Öktem Tanör, Ö. (2020). Validity, reliability and normative data of the Stroop test Çapa version. Turk Psikiyatri Dergisi [Turkish Journal of Psychiatry], 31(1), 9–21. Web.
Erdodi, L. A., Sagar, S., Seke, K., Zuccato, B. G., Schwartz, E. S., & Roth, R. M. (2018). The Stroop test as a measure of performance validity in adults clinically referred for neuropsychological assessment. Psychological Assessment, 30(6), 755–766. Web.
Galvan, M. C., & Pyrczak, F. (2020). Writing empirical research reports: A basic guide for students of the social and behavioral sciences (8th ed.). Routledge.
Huckin, T. N. (2019). A cognitive approach to readability. In New Essays in Technical and Scientific Communication (1st Edition, pp. 90–108). Routledge.
Kondo, Y., Iwasa, M., Kawaratani, H., Miyaaki, H., Hanai, T., Kon, K., Hirano, H., Shimizu, M., Yoshiji, H., Okita, K., & Koike, K. (2021). Proposal of Stroop test cut-off values as screening for neuropsychological impairments in cirrhosis: A Japanese multicenter study. Hepatology Research: The Official Journal of the Japan Society of Hepatology, 51(6), 674–681. Web.
Liu, Y., Yin, H., Ma, H., Yu, X., Liu, G., Guo, L., & Geng, Q. (2020). The salivary-α-amylase level after stroop test in anxious patients can predict the severity of anxiety. Neuroscience Letters, 715(134613), 134613. Web.
Parsons, S., Kruijt, A.-W., & Fox, E. (2019). Psychological science needs a standard practice of reporting the reliability of cognitive-behavioral measurements. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 251524591987969. Web.
PsyToolkit Stroop experiment. (n.d.). PsyToolkit.org. Web.
Raz, A., Kirsch, I., Pollard, J., & Nitkin-Kaner, Y. (2006). Suggestion reduces the Stroop effect. Psychological Science, 17(2), 91–95. Web.
Sanborn, F. W., & Harris, R. J. (2019). A cognitive psychology of mass communication. Routledge.
Sand, A., & Nilsson, M. E. (2017). When perception trumps reality: Perceived, not objective, meaning of primes drives Stroop priming. Psychological Science, 28(3), 346–355. Web.
Song, D., Yu, D. S. F., Li, P. W. C., & Lei, Y. (2018). The effectiveness of physical exercise on cognitive and psychological outcomes in individuals with mild cognitive impairment: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 79, 155–164. Web.
Willingham, D. T., & Riener, C. (2019). Cognition: The thinking animal (4th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Zeng, X., Zhang, L.-Y., Liu, Q., Lu, C.-H., Wei, J., Shi, Z.-W., Huang, W.-R., Qu, L.-H., Xu, F., Wang, X.-H., Shi, P.-M., Tan, Y., Tan, W., Yuan, Z.-L., Xia, C.-Y., Liu, Y.-L., & Xie, W.-F. (2020). Combined scores from the EncephalApp Stroop test, number connection test B, and serial dotting test accurately identify patients with covert hepatic encephalopathy. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology: The Official Clinical Practice Journal of the American Gastroenterological Association, 18(7), 1618-1625.e7. Web.