Disentangling Genuine Semantic Stroop Effects in Reading from Contingency Effects: On the Need for Two Neutral Baselines

eLorentz, Eric; eMcKibben, Tessa; eEkstrand, Chelsea; eGould, Layla; eAnton, Kathryn; eBorowsky, Ron · 2016 · DOAJ

DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00386

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates the extent to which semantic Stroop effects in reading are genuine semantic phenomena versus artifacts of contingency learning. The Stroop effect, where naming the font color of a word is slowed by incongruent word meaning, is often used to demonstrate automatic semantic processing. However, previous research has confounded congruency with contingency learning, where faster responses occur for stimulus-response pairings that appear more frequently. Because congruent trials are often repeated more often than incongruent ones in standard designs, observed effects may reflect learned associations rather than semantic conflict. To disentangle these factors, the authors developed two neutral baselines matched for pair-frequency: one matching the high frequency of congruent trials and one matching the low frequency of incongruent trials. The research comprised four experiments using color words (CWs), color associates (CAs, e.g., “ocean”), and their pseudohomophones (PHs, e.g., “bloo,” “oshin”). Participants performed a color-naming task while ignoring the letter strings. Experiments 1 and 3 examined CWs and CWPHs, while Experiments 2 and 4 examined CAs and CA-PHs. The design allowed for the isolation of genuine facilitation and interference by comparing performance against these frequency-matched neutral baselines, thereby controlling for the covariation between stimulus and response. The results demonstrated that contingency learning significantly contributes to Stroop effects. In Experiment 1, both CWs and CWPHs showed significant facilitation and interference relative to neutral baselines, indicating a genuine Stroop effect beyond contingency. However, a substantial portion of this effect (approximately 30% for words and 58% for pseudohomophones) was attributable to contingency learning. In contrast, Experiment 2 found that CAs and their pseudohomophones showed no significant facilitation or interference relative to onset-matched neutral baselines. When onsets were unmatched, CA words showed facilitation, but CA-PHs did not. These findings indicate that while color words produce genuine semantic Stroop effects, the effects observed with color associates are largely driven by contingency learning rather than semantic processing. The significance of these findings lies in the clarification of reading automaticity and the methodology of Stroop tasks. The study concludes that reading processes proceed to a semantic level for familiar words but not for pseudohomophones, which rely on phonetic decoding. Crucially, it demonstrates that the Stroop effect with color associates, often cited as evidence for pure semantic conflict, is primarily a result of contingency learning. The authors argue that using pair-frequency matched neutral baselines is essential for isolating genuine semantic contributions from contingency effects. This methodological refinement allows for a more accurate assessment of semantic processing in automatic word reading, challenging previous interpretations that attributed color associate effects solely to semantic conflict.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-25; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• task switching