Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37389672›Full record

ArticlePsychological research2024

Effects of alerting signals on the spatial Stroop effect: evidence for modality differences.

Todd A Kahan, Zachary P Smith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Todd A KahanDepartment of Psychology, Bates College, 4 Andrews Rd., Lewiston, ME, 04240, USA. tkahan@bates.edu.
Zachary P SmithDepartment of Psychology, Bates College, 4 Andrews Rd., Lewiston, ME, 04240, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reaction times and error rates to a target's identity are impaired when the target is presented in a location that mismatches the response required, relative to situations where the location of the target and required response overlap (the Simon effect) and the same is true when the target's identity conveys spatial information (the spatial Stroop effect). Prior studies have found that visual versions of the spatial Stroop effect are magnified when alerting cues appear before the target and results are consistent with a dual-route framework where alerting cues boost automatic stimulus-response motor associations through the direct processing route. However, the influence of alerting signals on auditory versions of the spatial Stroop effect have not been tested and there are reasons to believe that the alerting-congruency interaction may differ across stimulus modality. In two experiments the effects of alerting cues on auditory (Experiment 1; N = 98) and visual (Experiment 2; N = 97) spatial Stroop effects are examined. Results show that alerting cues boost the spatial Stroop effect with visual stimuli but not auditory stimuli and a distributional analysis provides support for there being modality differences in the decay (or inhibition) of response-code activation. Implications for explanations of the alerting-congruence interaction are discussed.

Indexed as

AttentionCuesHumansInhibition, PsychologicalReaction TimeStroop Test

Identifiers

PMID37389672
PMCPMC10806229

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.