The Stroop Effect: How Our Brains Process Information

Through research, it has been established that the act of reading words is faster than reading the objects or their characteristics. Word reading is seen to be automatic as a result of the wide practice, and this shows the automatic concept of the cognitive science. These automatic processes are seen as the things that done unintentionally cannot be controlled, one is not aware of their happening, and they tend to be fast. Incompatible words cause interference and confusion while trying to name colors (Berkovits, 2013). The act of reading is an automatic action of the brains, and it is hard to convince the mind not to read the names. It is also stated that the faster the processes the affect, the slower processes in a human brain but not the vice versa (Sugg, 2011). The words can be read faster than the color. Hence it affects the naming of the color, and hence there is interference when one is asked to name the color and ignore the words. Stroop also noted that the naming of the colors could not affect the reading of the words. 

However, Macleod and Dunbar opposed the theory by Stroop on the interference that it was due to the speed of the processing account (Sugg, 2011). They based the occurrence on the experience and the difference in training between the two that is the training offered in reading words and the one accorded in training for the colors. There have been three explanations that have emerged to try and explain the Stroop interference. The first is the Cohen, Dunbar and McClelland's idea which argued that the interference arouses from the level of training that was accorded to the training. This idea was generated in 1991. In 2003, Melara and Algom suggested that the interference was due to dimensional imbalance and dimensional uncertainty (Film media group, 2013). 

Dimensional imbalance arises from how the two dimensions of a stimulus correlate. Dimensional uncertainty depends on how relevant a stimulus is. They concluded that Stroop interference is exhibited since the color is more uncertain as compared to the word and the words are more salient than colors. Still, in 2003, Roelofs came up with his model of the Stroop interference. Roelofs explained that the interferences could be as a result of the difference of the architecture of the colors and the words. He stated that the colors require an extra step since it is not directly connected to its name as compared to word. 

Method 

Participants 

The act involved ten people. The females were five, and their male counterpart was five. It comprised of young people from the age of 18 years to the age of 22 years. There was one person with the age of 18 years six at the age of 19 years, two with the age of 20 years and one with the age of 22. One was in eleventh grade on the educational level, three in the freshman category, four in the sophomore category and one in the senior category. 

Materials 

There is a demonstration video. Hence one requires a screen for displaying it. It helps one to experience the Stroop interference as illustrated in the theory part. There will be a couple of words that will be presenting themselves on the screen, and the task of the people will be required to name the color of the word but not read the word itself. The display of the words will be displayed slowly at first and the speed increase with time. The main idea of the game is to stay focused. The number of words displayed is 27. The link to the video is https://youtu.be/CDsfAnSG2Ac. 

Procedure 

The names were displayed on the screen one at a time with each person required to name the color of the word. At first, the process was slow, and the velocity increases gradually. The words that an individual can name correctly are named against the total number of the words displayed. Then the individual was asked what they believe their scores were and were they able to see the tendency to name the word instead of the color. 

Result 

The participants were 10 and the words displayed were 27. Only 10% of the participant had a prior knowledge of the study. All the participants that are 100% were able to recognize the tendency to name the word instead of the color. 10% of the participants got 55.56% of the colors collect and failed the rest. 10% of the participant got 74.07% of the color names correctly. 10% of the people participating in the test got 77.78%. 10% of them acquired 81.48% of the total tests. 10% got 85.19% of the entire scores. 20% of participant obtained 88.89% collect of the colors. 10% of the people got 96.30%. Only 20% of those who participated in the activity named all the colors correctly. 

The results table 

Discussion 

All of the participants experienced the tendency of naming the word in place of the color. This is referred to as the interference where there are interactions between the new item and the transferred effects caused by behavior that leaned earlier, memories or prejudice that influences on how one comprehend to the new material. The Stroop Effect is clearly seen as the word seems to be recognized quickly as compared to the color. However, it is not clearly seen in the results since the higher percent of the participant got almost every naming collect. It is not easy to determine the method that explains the causes of the effects on the people that is the Cohen, Dunbar and McClelland's idea, Melara and Algom explanation and Roelofs point of view. I am looking forward to more research on the actual source of the interference. 

References  

Berkovits, M. (2013).  The Stroop effect on perception and memory: Explicit and implicit tests of Stroop-like dimensions . Ramat Gan: publisher not identified. 

Films Media Group & Video Education Australasia (2017).  The Stroop Effect . (Films on Demand.) 

Sugg, M. J. (2011).  Models of the Stroop effect: A review and evaluation .