Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39264479›Full record

SynthesisNeuropsychology review2025

Not All Stroop-Type Tasks Are Alike: Assessing the Impact of Stimulus Material, Task Design, and Cognitive Demand via Meta-analyses Across Neuroimaging Studies.

Veronika I Müller, Edna C Cieslik, Linda Ficco, Sandra Tyralla, Amir Ali Sepehry, Taraneh Aziz-Safaie, Chunliang Feng, Simon B Eickhoff, Robert Langner

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neuropsychology review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. The effects of childhood adversity: Two specific neural patterns.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Veronika I MüllerInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine, INM-7, Research Centre Jülich, Jülich, Germany. v.mueller@fz-juelich.de.ORCID 0000-0003-4382-3181
Edna C CieslikInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine, INM-7, Research Centre Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
Linda FiccoDepartment of General Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience, Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany.
Sandra TyrallaInstitute for Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Amir Ali SepehryClinical Psychology Program, Adler University (Vancouver Campus), Vancouver, Canada.
Taraneh Aziz-SafaieInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine, INM-7, Research Centre Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
Chunliang FengKey Laboratory of Brain, Cognition and Education Sciences, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China.
Simon B EickhoffInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine, INM-7, Research Centre Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
Robert LangnerInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine, INM-7, Research Centre Jülich, Jülich, Germany.

Funding

Meta-anaylsis in human brain mappingR01MH074457 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI FOX, PETER THORNTON · 2006 to 2024
$10.5M
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft EI 816/11-1NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH074457NIMH NIH HHS R01-MH074457
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Stroop effect is one of the most often studied examples of cognitive conflict processing. Over time, many variants of the classic Stroop task were used, including versions with different stimulus material, control conditions, presentation design, and combinations with additional cognitive demands. The neural and behavioral impact of this experimental variety, however, has never been systematically assessed. We used activation likelihood meta-analysis to summarize neuroimaging findings with Stroop-type tasks and to investigate whether involvement of the multiple-demand network (anterior insula, lateral frontal cortex, intraparietal sulcus, superior/inferior parietal lobules, midcingulate cortex, and pre-supplementary motor area) can be attributed to resolving some higher-order conflict that all of the tasks have in common, or if aspects that vary between task versions lead to specialization within this network. Across 133 neuroimaging experiments, incongruence processing in the color-word Stroop variant consistently recruited regions of the multiple-demand network, with modulation of spatial convergence by task variants. In addition, the neural patterns related to solving Stroop-like interference differed between versions of the task that use different stimulus material, with the only overlap between color-word, emotional picture-word, and other types of stimulus material in the posterior medial frontal cortex and right anterior insula. Follow-up analyses on behavior reported in these studies (in total 164 effect sizes) revealed only little impact of task variations on the mean effect size of reaction time. These results suggest qualitative processing differences among the family of Stroop variants, despite similar task difficulty levels, and should carefully be considered when planning or interpreting Stroop-type neuroimaging experiments.

Indexed as

BrainCognitionNeuroimagingStroop TestBrain MappingHumansActivation likelihood estimationCognitive controlInterference resolutionNeuroimaging meta-analysisStroop

Identifiers

PMID39264479
PMCPMC12602573

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.