stroop_effect/extras.html at master · MayukhSobo/stroop_effect · GitHub

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
---
layout: default
---

<div class="container">
	<div class="row">
		<div class="col">
			<h1><div class="wow zoomIn">Fun Facts <i class="em em-grinning"></i></div></h1><br><br>
			<h2><div class="wow zoomIn center">
				  What causes Stroop Effect ?
			</div></h2>
			<p>
				<div class="wow zoomIn just">
					What this reveals is that the brain can’t help but read. As habitual readers, we encounter and comprehend words on such a persistent basis that the reading occurs almost effortlessly, whereas declaration of a color requires more cognitive effort. When there is a conflict between these two sources of information, our cognitive load is increased, and our brains have to work harder to resolve the required difference. Performing these tasks (preventing reading, processing word color, and resolving information conflict) ultimately slows down our responses, and makes the task take longer.
					<br>
					There are a few theories that slightly differ in their definitions of the Stroop Effect, yet their differences mostly lie in which part that they emphasize. For example, one theory emphasizes that the automaticity of reading as the principal cause of Stroop interference, while another emphasizes the mental prioritizing which we perform when reading, as compared to defining colors. While differences in theories may therefore exist, all essentially converge on the central premise that reading is a simpler and more automatic task than stating colors, and that a conflict between the two will increase the time needed for processing.
				</div>
			</p>
			<!-- ################# -->
			<h3><div class="wow zoomIn center">
				 Participants spent almost 36% less time reading the <span id="orange"> CONGRUENT</span> words as compared to <span id="green"> INCONGRUENT </span> words.
			</div></h3><br>
			<h3><div class="wow zoomIn center">
				 This test would have been more fun if the word were given are all <span id="green"> INCONGRUENT</span> but the two test groups are males and female only. This would result in finding if both males and females took same time or they took different times. Probably a 2 tailed Hypothesis test between their mean scores would be helpful.
			</div></h3><br>
			<h3><div class="wow zoomIn center">
				 See if this effect is still this effective if there are no words but only digits.
			</div></h3><br>

			<h3><div class="wow zoomIn center">
				 How effective this test would be if we take all children who can read the words but can not relate these with colors!
			</div></h3><br>

			<h3><div class="wow zoomIn center">
				 A peep into <a href="https://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/words.html">this</a> page reveals that some other alternatives of the stroop test like using non color words or using emotional words.
			</div></h3><br>

			<h3><div class="wow zoomIn center">
				 One final thing that could be really interesting is that mixing <span id="orange">CONGRUENT</span> and <span id="green"> INCONGRUENT </span> words and how participants quickly switch their attention. This can be used to test the learning reflex of the them.
 			</div></h3><br>

 			<h2><div class="wow zoomIn center" id="blue">
				 I wonder how stroop test works out for color blind people <i class="em em-smirk"></i>
 			</div></h2><br>
		</div>
	</div>
</div>