ReviewArchives of sexual behavior2023
The Stroop Task Sex Difference: Evolved Inhibition or Color Naming?
Review in Archives of sexual behavior, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Short-term intrinsic connectivity changes induced by cognitive exertion in healthy participants.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- Relationship between frailty and executive function by age and sex in the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging.GeroScience · 2025Article
- Sex/gender differences in general cognitive abilities: an investigation using the Leiter-3.Cognitive processing · 2024Article
- Regression-based normative data for the D-KEFS Color-Word Interference Test in Norwegian adults ages 20-85.The Clinical neuropsychologist · 2024Article
- Inhibition changes across the lifespan: experimental evidence from the Stroop task.BMC psychology · 2024Article
- Associations between neurological soft signs, executive functions, and brain-derived neurotrophic factor in boys with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.Indian journal of psychiatry · 2024Article
- Androgen treatment effects on neurocognition in female-to-male transgender adolescents.Revista de neurologia · 2024Article
- Understanding visual perception in visual snow syndrome: a battery of psychophysical tests plus the 30-day clinical diary.Brain communications · 2024Article
- On the utility of Colour in shape analysis: An introduction to Colour science via palaeographical case studies.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Prefrontal cortex activation patterns in age-related cognitive decline: insights from verbal fluency task.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Previous research shows that women outperform men in the classic Stroop task, but it is not known why this difference occurs. There are currently two main hypotheses: (1) women have enhanced verbal abilities, and (2) women show greater inhibition. In two Stroop experiments, we examined the Inhibition hypothesis by adopting a procedure, often used in visual cognition paradigms, that induces a particular inhibitory component. So-called Negative Priming occurs when a distracting non-target stimulus on one trial becomes the target on the following trial. Results from our experiments showed that the degree to which this type of inhibition occurs within the Stroop effect is no different for men and women. This was the case irrespective of whether participants made a vocal response (Experiment 1; n = 64, 32 men and 32 women) or a manual response (Experiment 2; n = 64, 32 men and 32 women). These results do not therefore support the Inhibition hypothesis. We additionally review findings from a range of paradigms that can be seen as indexing the different components required for the Stroop task (e.g., distractor suppression). This review suggests that the sex effect is due to superior color naming ability in women.
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.