• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Discover if automatic activities (EG reading) can interfere with other (controlled attention) tasks (EG correctly identifying colours).

Extracts from this document...





The research looked at the Stroop task and the interference of two factors, the written word and the colour of the ink. There were 10 participants, aged 17-19, 5 male and 5 female. It was repeated measures design, and there were 2 conditions, the normal/non-conflicting list of words, and the Stroop/conflicting list of words. Using the related t-test show the results were found to be significant at the P<0.01% level. It was concluded that automatic processes, which we are not aware of (e.g. Reading), interfere with attention, and obstruct the participant’s performance.


My research is from the cognitive area of psychology, and more directly concerned with the use and application of attention. In 1935 Stroop found that reading interfered with judging the colours of words. There are several explanations of this ‘Stroop effect’. The task requires the use of attention. Perhaps the two weakest theories as to why this happens are that words are read faster than colours, and that naming the colours requires more attention than reading the words, and so the brain opts for the easiest version until told otherwise.

Schneider & Shiffrin (1977), states that attention can be divided into automatic and controlled processing. Automatic refers to activities we don’t know how we perform, we just automatically do.

...read more.



  • 3 normal/same lists of words
  • 3 conflicting lists of works
  • Stopwatch

To compile the normal word lists I created 3 pages (20 words per page written in 4 colours) all in the same font type and size, on a word-processing package. The words were randomly listed on the page (I made sure there were no patterns in the word list by reading them) and were the same colour as the word that was written. I followed this method for the 3 conflicting word lists, except changed the colour of the word so it was different from the written word on the page. See appendix 2 for word lists.


Participants were read the standardised instructions (see appendix 1), after which the 6 word lists were placed face down on the table. The lists (see appendix 2) were arranged with the conflicting lists first for 5 participants and the normal lists first for the other 5 participants in order to combat order effects. When told to ‘go’, the stopwatch was started and the participant turned over the 1st word list. When he/she finished reading they said ‘stop’, and the stopwatch was stopped. The time was then recorded, and this was repeated until all 6-word list times were recorded. The participants were then de-briefed (see appendix 3).


The materials used, standardised instructions and de-briefing were kept the same for all participants.

...read more.


However, as mentioned by Logan (1980), controlled processes can become automatic if used repeatedly, therefore if asked to perform this task many times, it could become automatic. Therefore, instead of being under conscious control it would become unconscious like normal reading and require less time and concentration.

If I was to repeat the experiment again, there are other factors I would like to investigate, to determine whether they have an effect on the results or not.

These are:

  • The experimental design. Using matched pairs (matched on reading speed) would control all order effects.
  • A different sampling method. Using a stratified sample would allow the results to be more representative of the true population.

Further Research Ideas

  • Children. Trying this experiment with a small child who has not yet learned to read would provide more data to support the theory, because reading has not yet become automatic for them.


Logan G. D. (1985). Attention and automacity in Stroop and priming tasks

Taken from:



Shiffrin R. M & Schneider, W (1977) Controlled and automatic information processing

Taken from:






Stroop J. R. (1935) Studies of interference in serial-verbal reaction

Richard Gross 2001

“Psychology, the science of mind and behaviour”

Hodder & Stoughton – London                         Page 193-194

...read more.

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Comparing length of words in newspapers section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Comparing length of words in newspapers essays

  1. memory. This experiment is a replication of the 1973 study conducted by Gordon ...

    Group 91/216 42% Experimental Group 187/216 87% Control Group - Individual Subjects (# correct) Subject A Subject B Subject C Subject D Total Percent List 1 9 9 5 2 25/36 69% List 2 6 4 4 0 14/36 39% List 3 6 3 6 0 15/36 42% List 4

  2. The aim of the experiment was to see if people's attention is affected by ...

    Hypothesis Research Aim: The aim of the study is to find out if there is a significant difference in the two separate lists of words in the Stroop Task. Experimental hypothesis It will take participants longer to read the word list where the colour of the ink and the word

  1. Assesment of Reading Difficulties in Patient AM Following the Development of Vascular Dementia.

    In contrast it is the peripheral dyslexias with which I am concerned in this report. The peripheral dyslexias being; neglect dyslexia in which a words ending is often preserved with its beginning altered. Letter by letter reading is a disorder in which words can only be identified and successfully read after having named each letter individually either aloud or sub-vocally.

  2. Investigating the Levels of Processing Theory

    To use matched participants would not be practical either because it is too time consuming, and it would be difficult to try and match people on their memory (especially as this would give away the aim of the study). I am only using the two conditions, to show the difference

  1. A dual-task study designed to permit inferences about cognitive processes

    Participants All of the participants in this experiment were known by the researcher as friends and colleagues. None of the participants was familiar with the hypothesis being tested. They were recruited by asking if they wanted to participate in an experiment.

  2. Is color naming a controlled process or an automatic process?Experiment

    Stroop found that subjects averaged 74% longer to name ink colors of incongruent words than regular words with black ink. A parallel distributed processing model proposed by Stroop stated that word processing is much faster than color processing. This is because different tasks involve different processing pathways and biological wiring.

  1. Investigation into the effects of levels of processing.

    Participants were then asked to write down as many of the words as they can remember. It was found that all of the participants remembered more deeply processed words that shallowly processed words.

  2. AS Psychology Coursework- Research on Deeper Processing

    The results then showed that 70% of the semantically-processed words were recognized. However, only 35% and 15% of the words that were phonetically and structurally processed were recalled, respectively. Rationale According to the levels of processing theory, significant events improves memory, this suggests that if an idea is not only

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work