EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY

(BS Psychology 2)
Coordinator: Date:
Maguinda, Angelie October 11, 2022
Members:
Acedilla, Dhana Lace
Aldemita, Jaime Augusto
Dy, Anthea Marie

STROOP TEST
(for Between-Subjects Design)

Stroop (1935) presented subjects with words which were printed in different colored
inks. In some lists (congruent) the words spelled out color names which were the same as
the ink colors (e.g. the word "red" written in red ink). In other lists (incongruent), the
words were color words which DID NOT agree with the ink colors (e.g. the word "red"
written in blue ink). When the subjects were given the two kinds of list and asked to name
the ink colors as quickly as possible, they were much slower and made many more mistakes
when words and inks disagreed (incongruent) compared to when the words and inks agreed
(congruent). This is called the Stroop effect. One explanation for the Stroop effect is that
for most of us, reading is a very well-practiced and automatic process, and in the presence
of words, occurs whether we want it to or not. The reading interferes with the response of
naming the ink color when the two are different.

GENERAL AREA: Learning

HYPOTHESIS: People will be able to read color names faster when they are the same as
the ink colors than when they are not.
Independent variable: Congruence of color names and ink colors.
Dependent variable: Reading speed

DESIGN: within-subjects / two randomized groups

Stimulus Conditions:
1. Congruent. The congruent list will contain 24 words which spell out the names of
colors. Each word will be printed in the same color ink as the color name.
Subjects are asked to name the ink colors and are relatively fast and accurate on
this list. Although they automatically read the color names in this list, because
the color name agrees with the ink color, there is little interference.
2. Incongruent. The incongruent list will contain 24 words which spell out the
names of colors. Each word will be printed in an ink which is different from the
color name. Subjects are slower and make more mistakes when naming the ink
colors in this list because they automatically read the color name which is
different from the correct response (ink color). This condition produces a lot of
interference.

MATERIALS: Congruent List (Annex A)

-1-
 Incongruent List (Annex A)

PROCEDURES:

1. Randomly assign your subjects either to the congruent or incongruent conditions.

2. Once you have randomly assigned a particular subject to an order, read the
instructions to the subject.

“I am going to show you a list of words written in different colored inks. Please say
the ink color of each word out loud as quickly as possible. As soon as you have
finished responding to one word, move onto the next one, until you are finished with
the whole list, as quickly as possible. When you get done, please say, "Done!".
Remember to say the ink colors out loud—ignore what the words actually spell out.”
(Repeat the instructions if necessary before you give the next list.)

These lists were constructed to possess the following characteristics: 4 color words
which were one syllable in length; with each possible color word used 6 times; each
ink color corresponding to the words was also used 6 times.

3. Ask if the subject understands the instructions before you begin. Get your timer
ready. Remind your subject to say, "Done!" when they finish the list. When you are
both ready to begin, give the subject the first list, say "Go!", and measure the total
time it takes for the subject to finish reading all the words. When they say, "Done!",
stop your timer. The difference between the starting time and the ending time is the
total time that it took your subject to read the list.

4. After you have finished a list, write down the time you measured on the line at the
bottom of the data sheet. Now do repeat the same procedure for your second list.

5. Debriefing: Again, we will not do a formal debriefing for the projects. When the
experiment is over, you must ask if the subject would like to explain what the study
is about -- if the answer is "Yes", then explain. Also, offer to address any questions
or comments about the experiment.

RESULTS:
The data sheet (Annex B) should have the list reading times for both the congruent and the
incongruent lists for each subject. Also, you should write down which order you used for
presenting the lists. (Remember, you will have 2 orders, and 10 subjects in each order.)

DISCUSSION:
1. What does it mean to say that a perceptual skill like reading is "automatic"? What are
the advantages and disadvantages to automaticity?
- The perceptual skill is “automatic” for us because we were taught how to
read since young and have since been developed through extensive practice,
barely even thinking about “how” we do it. The advantage of this is that it
occurs effortlessly and makes minimal demands on attention and working
memory. But, on the other hand, it can also have disadvantages such that our
choices are constrained with so many options and may not be consciously
driven. Furthermore, it can also be subject to manipulation that is outside of
our awareness.

-2-
2. You were asked to randomly assign your subjects to the list orders (congruent first
vs. incongruent first). Why did I ask you to do this?

- Random assignment helps keep the studies experiment unbiased and helps
control extraneous variables that might affect the results such as the
participant has very superb reading comprehension and may not be affected
by the incongruence of the list. Furthermore, randomised list order ensures
that there is a fair distribution of participants and that there are no systematic
differences within the treatment groups.

3. Why is it probably a good idea to limit your subjects to people who are fluent English
speakers/readers? What do you think would happen to the ink-naming if the letters
in your lists did not spell color words, but were nonsense strings of letters, like
ìSFDTYî?

- It is a good idea to limit the subjects to people who are fluent in English for
the sole reason that they can be better readers since the words being read
are also in English. The words that were used are in perfect spelling, if the
words were nonsense strings of letters then it would be easier for the
participants to name the color since your brain isn't familiar with the strings
of letters or are unreadable. Your brain wouldn't have to read the word and at
the same time identify the color of the word, making it easier to identify the
color.

-3-
 ANNEX A
Incongruent Congruent

-4-
 ANNEX B
Data

subject # initials list order time

Congruent Incongruent
1 Marieve Gillian M.G. A Congruent 11.18 seconds
Aldemita
2 Carlo Aldemita C. A Incongruent 20.74 seconds
3 Chona Aldemita C. A Congruent 10.63 seconds
4 Aizhia Uy A. U Incongruent 21.14 seconds
5 Niel Lador N. L Congruent 16.12 seconds
6 Yasmine Abellanosa Y. A Incongruent 17.40 seconds
7 Jea Franceska Albano J. F. A Congruent 12.53 seconds
8 Karen Niere K. N Congruent 14.26 seconds
9 James Knowell Osumo J. K. O Incongruent 19.56 seconds
10 Jared Meneses J. M Congruent 11.75 seconds
11 Cassandra Ababa C. A Congruent 12.39 seconds
12 James Ryan J.R.M Incongruent 25. 91 seconds
Maguinda
13 Angie Maguinda A.M Incongruent 19.26 seconds
14 Jason Maguinda J.M Congruent 11.56 seconds
15 Shari Stacey Bacalso S.S.B Incongruent 18.24 seconds
16 Vince Rodriguez V.R Congruent 7.98 seconds
17 Vianney Maglasang V.M Incongruent 28.74 seconds
18 Jovelyn Perez J.P Congruent 7.81 seconds
19 Percyphine perez P.P Incongruent 20 seconds
20 Terence Mathew T.M.U Incongruent 29.80 seconds
Ugang

Congruent List: Incongruent List:

Mean time: 11.6 seconds 22.1 seconds

Median time: 11.7 seconds 20.37 seconds

-5-