ArticleMemory & cognition2022
Can the Stroop effect serve as the gold standard of conflict monitoring and control? A conceptual critique.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Not All Stroop-Type Tasks Are Alike: Assessing the Impact of Stimulus Material, Task Design, and Cognitive Demand via Meta-analyses Across Neuroimaging Studies.Neuropsychology review · 2025Pooled it
- Effects of fruit and vegetable intake on memory and attention: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.Systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- The effects of intelligibility on conflict resolution and monitoring during speech recognition in noise.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- No evidence that selection is resource-demanding in conflict and bilingual language production tasks: Implications for theories of adaptive control and language-control associations.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Article
- Article
- Evidence for conflict monitoring during speech recognition in noise.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024Article
- Impact of Acute Dopamine Replacement on Cognitive Function in Parkinson's Disease.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2024Article
- A spatial version of the Stroop task for examining proactive and reactive control independently from non-conflict processes.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2024Article
- Conflict detection and resolution in macaque frontal eye fields.Communications biology · 2024Article
- Exploring Temporal and Intensity Effects of Resistance Exercise on Inhibition: A Four-Arm Crossover Randomized Controlled Trial.Psychology research and behavior management · 2024Article
- Principles of cognitive control over task focus and task switching.Nature reviews psychology · 2023Article
- Do Task Sets Compete in the Stroop Task and Other Selective Attention Paradigms?Journal of cognition · 2023Article
- A mouse-tracking study of the composite nature of the Stroop effect at the level of response execution.PloS one · 2023Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Stroop effect has been a key to the assay of selective attention since the time of the epoch-making study by J.R. Stroop almost a century ago. However, recent work based on computational modeling and recording of brain activations ignored the primary meaning of the Stroop effect as a measure of selectivity-with the Stroop test losing its raison d'être. Espousing the new framework, numerous studies in the past 20 years conceived performance in the Stroop task in terms of conflict-induced adjustments governed by central control on a trial-to-trial basis. In the face of this tsunami, we try to convince the reader that the Stroop effect cannot serve as a testing ground for conflict-monitoring and control, because these constructs are fundamentally unsuited to serve as a candidate theory of Stroop processes. A range of problems are discussed that singly and collectively pose grave doubts regarding the validity of a control and conflict monitoring account in the Stroop domain. We show how the key notion of conflict is misconstrued in conflict-monitoring models. Due to space limitations and for sake of wider accessibility, our treatment here cannot be technical.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34766252What 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.