Separating Speed from Automaticity in a Patient with Focal Brain Atrophy

Abstract

Automatic processes are characterized as being rapid, as requiring little attentional effort, and as obligatory (once initiated, the activity cannot be inhibited or controlled) In contrast, controlled processes are slower, require attention, and are non-obligatory This distinction appears in the Stroop effect the interference that appears when a person tries to name the color of the ink in which a word is printed when the word spells the name of a different color This effect has historically been attributed to an automatic reading of the color name interfering with the slower, less automatic, naming of the ink color (MacLeod, 1991, Stroop, 1935) In this report, we describe a patient with focal brain atrophy whose speed of reading was no faster than his speed of naming colors, but who still showed the classic Stroop effect This finding critically challenges the traditional identification of automaticity with processing speed

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Benson

D.F.

Davis

H.J.

Snyder

B.D.

(1988). Posterior cortical atrophy Archives of Neurology, 45, 789–793.

Caselli

R.J.

(1995). Focal and asymmetric cortical degeneration syndromes. The Neurologist, 1, 1–19.

Cattell

J.M.

(1886). The time it lakes to see and name objects. Mind, 11, 63–65.

Cohen

J.D.

Dunbar

K.A.

McClelland

J.L.

(1990). On the control of automatic processes. A parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect Psychological Review, 97, 332–361.

Cohn

N.B.

Dustman

R.E.

Bradford

D.C.

(1984). Age related decrements in Stroop color test performance. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 40, 1244–1250.

Dyer

F.N.

(1973). The Stroop phenomenon and its use in the study of perceptual cognitive and response processes. Memory and Cognition, 1, 106–120.

Goodglass

Wingfield

Schonewill

Howerton

(1995, November). Alexia and a reverse Stroop effect in a case of posterior cerebral atrophy of Aphasia, San Diego.

Kimberg

D.Y.

Farah

M.J.

(1991). A unified account of cognitive impairments following frontal lobe damage. The role of working memory in complex organized behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology, General, 122, 411–428.

Logan

G.D.

(1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization Psychological Review, 95, 492–527.

10.

MacKay

D.G.

(1982). The problem of flexibility fluency and speed accuracy trade off in skilled behavior. Psychological Review, 89, 483–506.

11.

MacKay

D.G.

(1988). The organization of perception and action. A theory for language and other cognitive skills, New York, Springer Verlag.

12.

MacLeod

C.M.

(1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 163–203.

13.

Morton

Chambers

S.M.

(1973). Selective attention to words and colours. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 25, 387–397.

14.

Posner

M.J.

Snyder

C.R.

(1975). Attention and cognitive control. In Solso

R.L.

, (Ed.), Information processing in cognition, (pp. 55–85), Hillsdale, NJ Erlbaum.

15.

Raichle

M.E.

(1994). Images of the mind: Studies with modern imaging techniques Annual Review of Psychology, 45, 333–356.

16.

Raichle

M.E.

Fiez

J.A.

Videen

T.O.

MacLeod

A.K.

Pardo

J.V.

Fox

P.T.

Petersen

S.E.

(1994). Practice-related changes in human brain functional anatomy during nonmotor learning, Cerebral Cortex, 4, 8–26.

17.

Shiffrin

R.M.

Schneider

(1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing II Perceptual learning automatic attending and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127–190.

18.

Stroop

J.R.

(1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662.