Stroop-Like Interference in the Fruit Stroop Test in Typical Development

Abstract

This study examined Stroop-like interference in the fruit Stroop test among 271 5 -12-year-old children and young adults divided into five age groups: 64 5 -6-year-olds, 65 7 -8-year-olds, 60 9 -10-year-olds, 46 11 -12-year-olds, and 36 young adults (18 -23-year-olds). Participants were administered a paper-and-pencil version of the fruit Stroop test, which includes the canonical color task, the superficial color task, and the fruit name task. In these tasks, participants were presented with line-drawings of fruits having strongly associated colors (e.g., yellow banana) and were asked to name the ink colors of the fruits, name the colors the fruit "should be", or read the fruit name. The results indicated robust interference in the canonical color task of the fruit Stroop test, suggesting that this task is useful to assess individual differences of inhibitory control in typical development.

Learning-based before intentional cognitive control: Developmental evidence for a dissociation between implicit and explicit control.

“…Improving on this design with children would require other concessions. It would presumably require another conflict task than the classic flanker task (Rueda et al, 2004) and fruit-color Stroop (Archibald & Kerns, 1999; Macdonald et al, 2014; Okuzumi et al, 2015) used here, both of which were difficult to extend to more than four stimuli. One possible option would be the object-color Stroop (see Prevor & Diamond, 2005), where object-color associations tend to be more ambiguous than fruit-color.…”

“…This task requires no word reading and allows for four stimuli, while resembling the classic Stroop in its use of matching and mismatched colors. The fruit Stroop does differ from the classic Stroop in the sense that it requires retrieval of LEARNING-BASED BEFORE INTENTIONAL CONTROL 1663 a stimulus feature in long-term memory (as do other variants of the Stroop, e.g., Konkle & Oliva, 2012), but it retains the core structure of responding to a relevant dimension, while disregarding a prepotent but irrelevant dimension (the displayed color, which encourages pressing the response key of the same color through simple perceptual matching), and provides results similar to the classic Stroop (for a discussion, see Prevor & Diamond, 2005; see also Okuzumi et al, 2015).…”

“…Testing PC effects required a conflict task, but most available conflict tasks were unsuitable for this purpose: The word reading required by the classic Stroop task was not appropriate for 5- to 6-year-olds, and child-friendly variants such as the day-night Stroop (Montgomery & Koeltzow, 2010) typically include only two items, which can involve mechanisms other than cognitive control such as contingency learning (see Braem et al, 2019; Schmidt & Besner, 2008). We chose to use the fruit Stroop (Archibald & Kerns, 1999; see also Ambrosi et al, 2016; Macdonald et al, 2014; Okuzumi et al, 2015), where children view fruits colored in correct (e.g., a banana in yellow) or incorrect colors (e.g., a banana in red), and answer according to the canonical color of the fruit rather than its displayed color (e.g., children should always answer “yellow” for a banana regardless of whether it is displayed in yellow or in another color). This task requires no word reading and allows for four stimuli, while resembling the classic Stroop in its use of matching and mismatched colors.…”

Crossmodal correspondences between basic tastes and visual design features: A narrative historical review

“…The curvilinearity features are not likely to exploit a definite source object as the mediator when being matched with a taste. However, the outlined shapes of an object, composed of various angular and rounded contours, can successfully cue the presence of a mediating object ( Okuzumi et al, 2015 ). Arguably, the connection between the object and its outline is not strictly the product of the internalization of crossmodal statistics, as making these connections does not involve computing the probability of the regularities between modalities.…”

The Blue Strawberry and a Giant Mouse? Stroop Effect in Assessment of Interference Control in Prereading Children

“…Children < 3 years have difficulties in suppressing the dominant ten- dency to show parts of their bodies because cognitive control is not yet developed. Interference control plays a crucial role for early cognitive development [15,13]. The classroom environment is full of distracting stimuli.…”