Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34135821›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021

eStroop: Implementation, Standardization, and Systematic Comparison of a New Voice-Key Version of the Traditional Stroop Task.

Riccardo Brunetti, Allegra Indraccolo, Claudia Del Gatto, Benedetto Farina, Claudio Imperatori, Elena Fontana, Jacopo Penso, Rita B Ardito, Mauro Adenzato

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Riccardo BrunettiDepartment of Human Sciences, Cognitive and Clinical Psychology Laboratory, Università Europea di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Allegra IndraccoloDepartment of Human Sciences, Cognitive and Clinical Psychology Laboratory, Università Europea di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Claudia Del GattoDepartment of Human Sciences, Cognitive and Clinical Psychology Laboratory, Università Europea di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Benedetto FarinaDepartment of Human Sciences, Cognitive and Clinical Psychology Laboratory, Università Europea di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Claudio ImperatoriDepartment of Human Sciences, Cognitive and Clinical Psychology Laboratory, Università Europea di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Elena FontanaDepartment of Psychology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Jacopo PensoDepartment of Psychology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Rita B ArditoDepartment of Neuroscience "Rita Levi Montalcini," University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Mauro AdenzatoDepartment of Psychology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Stroop effect is a well-documented phenomenon, demonstrating both interference and facilitation effects. Many versions of the Stroop task were created, according to the purposes of its applications, varying in numerous aspects. While many versions are developed to investigate the mechanisms of the effect itself, the Stroop effect is also considered a general measure of attention, inhibitory control, and executive functions. In this paper, we implement "eStroop": a new digital version based on verbal responses, measuring the main processes involved in the traditional effect. eStroop features four categories of stimuli in four different colors: (1) geometrical shapes, (2) neutral words, (3) congruent words, and (4) incongruent words. The results of the administration to 307 University students confirm the Stroop effect and offer baseline data for future research and clinical testing. Direct comparisons with other recent versions of the task are discussed, offering insights into differences and similarities between different task variables.

Indexed as

attentioncognitive controlexecutive functionsfacilitationinterference

Identifiers

PMID34135821
PMCPMC8200406

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.