Response interference in compatibility tasks

Affective priming (AP) is a well-established phenomenon in which performance to a valenced target is typically better when it is preceded by an affectively congruent prime than when it is preceded by an incongruent prime. Several studies have emphasized a strong similarity between AP and Stroop sugg...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Experimental psychology 2011, Vol.58 (4), p.257-270
Main Authors: Berthet, Vincent, Kop, Jean-Luc, Kouider, Sid
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Attention - physiology
Cognitive science
Color Perception - physiology
Emotions
Executive Function - physiology
Female
France
Humans
Inhibition (Psychology)
Male
Psychological Tests
Reaction Time - physiology
Semantics
Stroop Test
Visual Perception - physiology
Young Adult
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Affective priming (AP) is a well-established phenomenon in which performance to a valenced target is typically better when it is preceded by an affectively congruent prime than when it is preceded by an incongruent prime. Several studies have emphasized a strong similarity between AP and Stroop suggesting that both are driven by response interference. The present study investigated this hypothesis by testing whether a general prediction of the response interference model was verified in the two tasks. This prediction refers to target strength and states that the size of compatibility effects should increase as the strength of the relevant information decreases. In four experiments, we show that this general prediction of the response interference model was verified in AP and Stroop when the strength of the relevant information was manipulated at the perceptual level (Experiments 1 and 2), while the opposite pattern was observed when this variable was manipulated at the semantic level (Experiments 3 and 4). While the results do not undermine the hypothesis that AP and Stroop effects are governed by response interference, they suggest that the model should be refined in order to account for differential effects of target strength in compatibility tasks.
ISSN:1618-3169
2190-5142
DOI:10.1027/1618-3169/a000092