ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2026
Multiple sources of conflict in the flanker task: Flanker interference can be decomposed into cumulative components.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Interference created by incongruent stimuli in the classic Stroop task appears to be a complex phenomenon, attributed to multiple sources: task conflict (created by the possibility of engaging both word reading and color naming), semantic conflict (created by incompatibility between the concepts denoted by the word and the color), and response conflict (created when the word and the color are associated with two different possible responses). This composite view has seen little use in other conflict tasks, even though interference might reflect multiple sources of conflict in those tasks as well. The current pre-registered study attempted to decompose interference in the classic flanker task. A sample of 130 participants from two countries identified a centrally presented letter while ignoring flanking stimuli, which could be of ten different types (from least to most expected interference: no flanker, simple dots, patches of random visual noise, meaningless simple shapes, meaningless complex shapes, meaningful pictograms, digits, non-response set letters, and letters belonging to the response set; congruent trials were also included as a reference). The results clearly showed cumulative levels of interference as flankers became processable, meaningful, and identifiable as a possible response, indicating that different types of conflict do contribute to interference in the flanker task. The results broadly map onto the task, semantic, and response types of conflict identified in the Stroop task, with a few nuances. Our findings suggest that the presence of multiple sources of conflict may be a very general phenomenon in conflict tasks, extending well beyond Stroop interference.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41979763What 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.