Introduction
In the first half of the XX century, John Ridley Stroop paid his attention to the study, which explained that it takes people more time to process and name the pictures of colors or objects than to read their written forms out loud (Weiner & Craighead, 2010, p. 1712). The result of this experiment is currently known as the Stroop effect. Anyone can try to conduct it through measuring whether there is a difference in time required to name the colors of words that match them or not.
The general idea behind this theory is that human brain works differently when processing various kinds of information. There have been many theories trying to explain the Stroop effect (Jarvis & Russell, 2002, p. 152). The most substantial theory seems to be provided by the automaticity concept, which implies, for instance, that reading is a more automated and, subsequently, a faster process than naming colors (Dulaney & Ellis, 1997, p. 185). It must be stated that, according to this model, it is not a necessary condition that the automated process requires less time than the one which calls for paying some attention.
Aim
The aim of this paper is to find out whether the time required for identifying and processing both congruent and incongruent data is different.
This paper is based on the variation of the Stroop experiment. Several geometric shapes were put on the two lists and supported with either congruent or incongruent data. The result would be the difference in time taken to process each type of the list. This measurement would work as the primary source of supporting or objecting the hypothesis that has been chosen to be a directional one for this study.
Experimental Hypothesis
It takes a longer time to process information supported with incongruent data when naming fourteen shapes than it is for the same set having the congruent words.
Null Hypothesis
There is no difference in time required for each person to name the shapes with both congruent and incongruent description. Any difference shown as a result is purely accidental and is caused by various factors such as environment, the physical and emotional state of a respondent, language skills, etc.
Method
Design
The participants were required to go through each set of questions one test after another. Both tests were designed similarly to eliminate any possibilities of inaccurate results due to the inability to read the information equally well. The experiment did not focus on color but rather used the pair of words and shapes instead. That is why there was no need to make the test materials colorful, and it was enough to make them contrasting and ensure that the text and figures were large enough.
The initial part of the experiment was based on explaining, in brief, the task for the group of participants regarding what was expected of them. After this step, each participant was asked to follow to a separate room nearby to present his or her answers to the interviewer conducting the experiment. The interviewer was measuring the time that each candidate showed when giving the answers. The separate room was required to eliminate the possibility of distraction, as well as prevent other participants from finding the answers beforehand.
There are, in fact, some limitations to this design. Firs of all, the participants could get tired during the waiting, which could affect their timing result. Secondly, there was a chance that some of them became anxious after giving the wrong answer, which automatically made their further responses slow or incorrect. Finally, it was possible that some of them had experienced an unpleasant event earlier that day, which could occupy their mind and affect the speed of reaction.
The ethical guidelines were also followed. As most of the participants were younger than 18 years old, the consent forms had been signed by their parents clarifying that they were not against their children taking part in the experiment. The environmental was suitable for ensuring the physical and mental health of the participants is not endangered. All results were anonymous to ensure the information would not be used for purposes other than this experiment.
The independent variable was the congruent or incongruent condition, as well as the test lists with 8 shapes supported by 8 words in a row.
The dependent variable was the number of seconds taken for each participant to give an answer out loud.
Participants
The invitational and stratified sampling was used in this experiment. There were 14 participants in total, equally representing both genders. The age of the participants ranged from 16 to 18 years old. All of them were students from the PreIB class, who decided to take part in the research voluntarily. The important notice about this group should be made, stating that most of the people from it did not have the English language as their mother tongue, which could possibly affect the final results.
Materials
- Computer
- Stopwatch
- 7 papers with congruent words
- 7 papers with incongruent words
- A list of instructions for a person conducting the experiment
- 14 consent forms for each of the participants
Procedure
All the participants were invited to the room that was specified and prepared beforehand. The person conducting the test welcomed them and ensured everyone was comfortable. After everybody had taken their place, the instructions were given and the example method of answering the test questions was demonstrated. Since every participant showed the understanding of the procedure, each of them was later invited one by one to a separate empty room to provide answers. All the participants were also asked if they understood the meaning of words to eliminate the possible inaccuracy created by the lack of English skills. After this step, a participant gave the answers while the person conducting the experiment tracked the progress with a stopwatch. In the end, everyone received a small pack of candy as gratitude for the participation.
Results
Descriptive
The data collected in this experiment represents the time measured in seconds. The table provided contains the mean and the standard deviation. Both of this measures are used to calculate the average meaning, as well as the dispersion of the shape recognition among the participants. The mean is used to show the difference in timing which is easier to trace. However, this data is not very precise, that is why the standard deviation has also been calculated.
The table shows that it took the group 0,63 seconds longer to give the answers to the list of shapes supported with incongruent words. However, this number is not big enough for it to make the null hypothesis fail. That is why the ANOVA test must be conducted to ensure the results are accurate.
Inferential
The ANOVA test allows receiving more precise results regarding the variation of data (De Muth, 2014, p.205). The table below features the overall numbers of answers, time, average measures, and the variance between them, as well as the sources of variation, which are taken as ones between and within groups, and the total value. The data calculated is compared to the sigma value to determine whether the final results are accurate.
As it can be seen from the table, the F result differs very much from the sigma value. That serves as a conclusion that the null hypothesis seems to be accurate, and the experimental one has failed (Cardinal & Aitken, 2013, p.187). Although the descriptive results show the difference in timing of more than half a second, the ANOVA test has not proved them to be accurate.
Discussion
Unfortunately, the results of the experiment have not proved the experimental hypothesis. Although the official literature has evidence of the shape recognition to depend on the supporting congruent and incongruent data (Styles, 2006, p. 197), this case has not fallen into this theory. The reasons for this could possibly be found in the design of the experiment.
Firstly, the number of shapes in the tests could be too small for operating with it. It would possibly be better to choose more than 50 elements for each test. Secondly, English was not the primary language to the most of the participants. The variance in timing could be explained by attempts to look for the proper name of the geometrical shape. Finally, four of the participants had the results which oppose to the official theory by showing longer time for the congruent test as compared to the incongruent one. Since this number makes up about a quarter of the group, it is evident why the results are not corresponding with the experimental theory.
Taking all these factors into consideration, it could be assumed that the experimental theory has failed not because it is inaccurate, but because the experiment has been designed inappropriately. While the descriptive results show the significant difference in timing, the inferential ones provided by ANOVA test draw the opposite conclusion. To make this study more accurate, the experiment must be conducted again with the method designed to eliminate the previous mistakes.
References
Cardinal, R. N., & Aitken, M. R. F. (2006). ANOVA for the behavioral sciences researcher. Mahwah, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
De Muth, J. E. (2014). Basic statistics and pharmaceutical statistical applications (3rd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Dulaney, C. L., & Ellis, N. R. (1997). Rigidity in the behavior of mentally retarded persons. In W. E. MacLean (Ed.), Ellis’ handbook of mental deficiency, psychological theory and research (175-196). New York, NY: Routledge.
Jarvis, M., & Russell, J. (2002). Key ideas in psychology. Cheltenham, UK: Nelson Thornes Ltd.
Styles, J. (2006). The psychology of attention (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Weiner, I. B., & Craighead, E. (2010). The Corsini encyclopedia of psychology (Vol.4). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.