ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Conflict adaptation in a confound-minimized face-word Stroop task: exploring the potential settings of an fMRI-related experiment.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Conflict adaptation refers to the adjustment of cognitive control to reduce interference on subsequent trials. Its neural mechanisms are often studied by assessing the congruence sequence effect (CSE) in face-word Stroop tasks during neuroimaging. The present behavioral study aimed to address two key methodological issues when aiming to translate standard response conflict tasks into fMRI settings: Ensuring the involvement of cognitive control in the CSE and demonstrating its temporal stability across varying inter-trial intervals. In a set of five experiments, using an adapted version of the face-word Stroop task, participants performed either a gender categorization (Experiment 3) or responded to the learned identity of four faces while ignoring the printed name (all other experiments). We specifically incorporated recent advancements in confound minimization to exclude effects of feature integration and contingency learning, included a priming component to further increase the involvement of cognitive control, and used a variable range of inter-trial intervals to test for potential applicability in fMRI research. Although a robust Stroop effect was consistently observed in all experiments, a strong CSE emerged specifically in the gender categorization task. In the confound-minimized face-word Stroop variant, a significant CSE occurred only under specific conditions (e.g., sufficiently long target presentation, bi-manual responses) and was accompanied by substantial inter-individual variability. Therefore, while we observed a reliable CSE in a confound-minimized face-word Stroop task with long inter-trial intervals, the increased methodological rigor that improves precision and interpretability also adds complexity and yields smaller and more variable effects. This trade-off constitutes an important consideration when aiming to adapt the Stroop task for fMRI applicability.
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.