In two experiments we address an ongoing debate concerning the processes driving context-driven modulations to the Stroop effect (Crump, Gong, & Milliken, 2006). In particular, we demonstrate that context-driven processes can modulate the size of the Stroop effect for frequency-unbiased item types. We also clarify the role of item frequency in producing context-driven modulations to the Stroop effect. Taken together, our results provide unambiguous support for the claim that contextual processing can impart fast and flexible control over the operation of selective attention processes during online performance.
AwhE.SgarlataA. M.KliestikJ. (2005). Resolving visual interference during covert spatial orienting: Online attentional control through static records of prior visual experience.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General134, 192–206.
2.
BrooksL. R.VokeyJ. R. (1991). Abstract analogies and abstracted grammars: Comments on Reber (1989), and Mathews et al. (1989).Journal of Experimental Psychology: General120, 316–323.
3.
ChunM. M. (2000). Contextual cueing of visual attention.Trends in Cognitive Sciences4, 170–178.
4.
CrumpM. J.GongZ.MillikenB. (2006). The context-specific proportion congruent Stroop effect: Location as a contextual cue.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review13, 316–321.
5.
CrumpM. J. C.VaqueroJ. M. R.MillikenB. M. (2008). Context-specific learning and control: The role of awareness, task-set, and relative salience.Consciousness & Cognition17, 22–36.
6.
EgnerT. (2008). Multiple conflict-driven control mechanisms in the human brain.Trends in Cognitive Sciences12, 374–380.
7.
HommelB.ProctorR. W.VuK. P. L. (2004). A feature integration account of sequential effects in the Simon task.Psychological Research68, 1–17.
8.
JacobyL. L.BrooksL. R. (1984). Nonanalytic cognition: Memory, perception, and concept formation.Psychology of Learning and Motivation18, 1–47.
9.
JacobyL. L.LindsayD. S.HesselsS. (2003). Item-specific control of automatic processes: Stroop process dissociations.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review10, 638–644.
10.
KolersP. A.RoedigerH. L. (1984). Procedures of mind.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour23, 289–314.
11.
LoganG. D. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization.Psychological Review95, 492–527.
12.
LoganG. D. (2002). An instance theory of attention and memory.Psychological Review109, 376–409.
13.
MayrU.BryckR. L. (2007). Outsourcing control to the environment: Effects of stimulus/response locations on task selection.Psychological Research71, 107–116.
14.
MewhortD. J. K.JohnsE. E. (2005). Sharpening the echo: An iterative-resonance model for short-term recognition memory.Memory13, 300–307.
15.
NeillW. T. (1997). Episodic retrieval in negative priming and repetition priming.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition23, 1291–1305.
16.
PalmeriT. J. (1997). Exemplar similarity and the development of automaticity.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition23, 324–354.
17.
SchmidtJ. R.BesnerD. (2008). The Stroop effect: Why proportion congruent has nothing to do with congruency and everything to do with contingency.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition34, 514–523.
18.
SchneiderW. (1988). Micro-experimental laboratory: An integrated system for IBM PC compatibles.Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments and Computers20, 206–217.
19.
StroopJ. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions.Journal of Experimental Psychology18, 643–662.
20.
Van SelstM.JolicoeurP. (1994). A solution to the effect of sample size on outlier elimination.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology47A, 631–650.
21.
WendtM.KluweR. H.VietzeI. (2008). Location-specific versus hemisphere-specific adaptation of processing selectivity.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review15, 135–140.
