ArticlePsychological research2023
Evaluating individual differences in rewarded Stroop performance: reliability and associations with self-report measures.
Article in Psychological research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- An examination of how reward associations facilitate and impair Stroop performance.Psychological research · 2025Article
- Hyper-binding: the surprising roles of age and affect.Psychological research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In three separate experiments, we examined the reliability of and relationships between self-report measures and behavioral response time measures of reward sensitivity. Using a rewarded-Stroop task we showed that reward-associated, but task-irrelevant, information interfered with task performance (MIRA) in all three experiments, but individual differences in MIRA were unreliable both within-session and over a period of approximately 4 weeks, providing clear evidence that it is not a good individual differences measure. In contrast, when the task-relevant information was rewarded, individual differences in performance benefits were remarkably reliable, even when examining performance one year later, and with a different version of a rewarded Stroop task. Despite the high reliability of the behavioral measure of reward responsiveness, behavioral reward responsiveness was not associated with self-reported reward responsiveness scores using validated questionnaires but was associated with greater self-reported self-control. Results are discussed in terms of what is actually being measured in the rewarded Stroop task.
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.