ArticleCerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991)2019
When Conflict Cannot be Avoided: Relative Contributions of Early Selection and Frontal Executive Control in Mitigating Stroop Conflict.
Article in Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Conflicting Sensory Information Sharpens the Neural Representations of Early Selective Visuospatial Attention.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024Article
- cTBS to Right DLPFC Modulates Physiological Correlates of Conflict Processing: Evidence from a Stroop task.Brain topography · 2024Article
- The DLPFC is centrally involved in resolving Stroop conflicts, suppressing distracting sensory input within the auditory and visual system.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Brain network mechanism on cognitive control task in the elderly with brain aging: A functional near infrared spectroscopy study.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
- The diachronic account of attentional selectivity.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2022Review
- Preserved sensory processing but hampered conflict detection when stimulus input is task-irrelevant.eLife · 2021Article
- Steady-State Visually Evoked Potentials and Feature-based Attention: Preregistered Null Results and a Focused Review of Methodological Considerations.Journal of cognitive neuroscience · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
When viewing familiar stimuli (e.g., common words), processing is highly automatized such that it can interfere with the processing of incompatible sensory information. At least two mechanisms may help mitigate this interference. Early selection accounts posit that attentional processes filter out distracting sensory information to avoid conflict. Alternatively, late selection accounts hold that all sensory inputs receive full semantic analysis and that frontal executive mechanisms are recruited to resolve conflict. To test how these mechanisms operate to overcome conflict induced by highly automatized processing, we developed a novel version of the color-word Stroop task, where targets and distractors were simultaneously flickered at different frequencies. We measured the quality of early sensory processing by assessing the amplitude of steady-state visually evoked potentials (SSVEPs) elicited by targets and distractors. We also indexed frontal executive processes by assessing changes in frontal theta oscillations induced by color-word incongruency. We found that target- and distractor-related SSVEPs were not modulated by changes in the level of conflict whereas frontal theta activity increased on high compared to low conflict trials. These results suggest that frontal executive processes play a more dominant role in mitigating cognitive interference driven by the automatic tendency to process highly familiar stimuli.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.