A Study of Congruence and Semantic Relatedness in the Stroop Effect

1
Running head: A STUDY OF CONGRUENCE AND SEMANTIC RELATEDNESS IN THE
STROOP EFFECT
A Study of Congruence and Semantic Relatedness in the Stroop Effect
Student’s Name
Institution Affiliation
Abstract

2
A STUDY OF CONGRUENCE AND SEMANTIC RELATEDNESS IN THE STROOP
EFFECT
The main objective of the study is to test if task completion time for incongruent and
semantically unrelated condition will be longer than those in the congruent condition and to
substantiate if the hypothesis is supported. Past studies have challenged the concept of
automaticity, and it proves that attentional control plays a significant role in the unconscious,
automatic semantic processing (Thomas, Nardini, & Mareschal, 2017). Participants of the study
were 32 undergraduate students, 23 women, and nine men. The Stroop task effect used red,
yellow, green and blue colors presented in a black background. There was three experimental set.
Set one presented color areas and the rules were to identify the colors in the set. Set two
presented color sets and incongruent conditions; the ruels were to discount the text meaning and
name the color of the text. Set three presented the congruent and semantic related condition. The
aim was to substantiate the hypothesis of the study. The study findings indicated that when
partakers were requested to disregard the text meaning and specify the color of the ink used in
the text, the response was longer to incongruent stimuli when compared to congruent stimuli.
The research finding demonstrated that task accomplishment time for the incongruent and
semantically unrelated task would be longer than those in the congruent and semantically related
condition.
Introduction
Typically, Stroop effect refers to an illustration of a response time of a task and is
customarily used to exemplify the landscape of sentient visual control versus automatic
processing. For instance, Stroop effect occurs when an individual is required to identify the color
of the text and not the meaning of the word. According to Bell, Forster, & Drake, (2015) it is
faster to name the color of the text if it is the same with its meaning when compared to

3
A STUDY OF CONGRUENCE AND SEMANTIC RELATEDNESS IN THE STROOP
EFFECT
incongruent conditions. Interference occurs when there is a different part for example, when an
individual looks at a word he/she see both its meaning and color. The two conflicting part
confuses the brain which makes a person to make a choice. The research that was conducted by
Bein, (2015) explains how our stored memory and experience has taught us that word color is
not as important as the word meaning. Therefore, people always pay attention to the word
meaning and not the color. In our contemporary society today, many scholars have tried to
understand how memory works, why it goes wrong and what it is. A human mind is an essential
part that makes us justly humans. Interference theory argues that interference occurs when
learned memory conflict with new material (Ebersole, Atherton, Belanger, Skulborstad, Allen,
Banks, & Brown, 2016). Stroop effect plays a significant role in the field of psychology as it is
used to understand the brain development of early school age children. On the other hand,
automaticity refers to everyday activities such as speaking and walking. Present studies have
shown that the human brain is a limited control processor that is not capable of managing both
high-order reasoning and fixed knowledge processing instantaneously (Entel, Tzelgov, Bereby-
Meyer, & Shahar, 2015). For instance, a person who speaks a language that he knows well will
not concentrate on the grammar or sentence structure instead the brain will only focus on the
message.
The automaticity of semantic processing of different words has brought a controversial
debate among different researchers; some argue that semantic processing of word denotation
occurs automatically as it can happen in the absence of conscious alertness and even introduced
without deliberate intent. However, other researchers argue that access to word meaning is a
controlled process that necessitates keen insight of a word and relays on the intention to
scrutinize the sense of a word. Recent studies tend to support the two contradicting views as the

4
A STUDY OF CONGRUENCE AND SEMANTIC RELATEDNESS IN THE STROOP
EFFECT
research that was conducted by Green, Locker, Boyer, & Sturz, (2016) indicated that
understanding of the meaning of a word happens inevitably which is supported by the
interference effect in the Stroop effect. According to Levin, & Tzelgov, (2016) naming latencies
are lower incongruent conditions than in the incongruent settings. For a case where partakers of
the study are given a list of colored text that is both incongruent and congruent conditions
indicated that semantic processing occurs inevitably as the semantic content of the word
obligatorily impact the responses regardless of the subject’s intent to ignore the meaning and
focus on color naming. It must be noted that the response time increases the closer the
immaterial word meaning is to the word color.
Moreover, the study of masked semantic priming favors the nation of automaticity of
semantic processes (Pashler, 2016). Semantic priming refers to the enablement effect of a
response to a target inducement, for example, a word by a meaningful linked prime stimulus.
According to Labuschagne, & Besner, (2015) semantic priming is universal in lexical decision
tasks. For instance, when the research partakers were asked to choose if a target word (e.g.,
chocolate) is a real word, the reaction time is accurate and faster if the target word is heralded by
a semantically linked word (e.g., sweet) when compared to an unrelated word like a car.
Therefore, semantic priming is the difference in reaction time between semantically related and
unrelated word pairs. A series of past studies have shown that contact to semantic can occur
involuntarily in an automatic condition.
Stroop effect is critical in understanding the learning process of developing children. The
difference in speed in naming colors is supported by the difference in the intensity of exercise of
the two conditions. Labuschagne, & Besner, (2015) proposed that information linked to the retort