Different types of semantic interference, same lapses of attention: Evidence from Stroop tasks

Neurocognitive mechanisms of emotional interference in native and foreign languages: evidence from proficient bilinguals

Currently available data show mixed results as to whether the processing of emotional information has the same characteristics in the native (L1) as in the second language (L2) of bilinguals. We conducted a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) experiment to shed light on the neurocognitive mechanisms underlying bilinguals' emotional processing in L1 and L2 during an emotional interference task (i.e., the Emotional Stroop Task - EST). Our sample comprised proficient Italian-English bilinguals who learned their L2 during childhood mainly in instructional rather than immersive contexts. In spite of no detectable behavioural effects, we found stronger brain activations for L1 versus L2 emotional words in sectors of the posteromedial cortex involved in attention modulation, episodic memory, and affective processing. While fMRI findings are consistent with the hypothesis of a stronger emotional resonance when processing words in a native language, our overall pattern of results points to the different sensitivity of behavioural and hemodynamic responses to emotional information in the two languages of bilingual speakers.

Semantic Stroop interference is modulated by the availability of executive resources: Insights from delta-plot analyses and cognitive load manipulation

We investigated whether, during visual word recognition, semantic processing is modulated by attentional control mechanisms directed at matching semantic information with task-relevant goals. In previous research, we analyzed the semantic Stroop interference as a function of response latency (delta-plot analyses) and found that this phenomenon mainly occurs in the slowest responses. Here, we investigated whether this pattern is due to reduced ability to proactively maintain the task goal in these slowest trials. In two pairs of experiments, participants completed two semantic Stroop tasks: a classic semantic Stroop task (Experiment 1A and 2A) and a semantic Stroop task combined with an n-back task (Experiment 1B and 2B). The two pairs of experiments only differed in the trial pace, which was slightly faster in Experiments 2A and 2B than in Experiments 1A and 1B. By taxing the executive control system, the n-back task was expected to hinder proactive control. Delta-plot analyses of the semantic Stroop task replicated the enhanced effect in the slowest responses, but only under sufficient time pressure. Combining the semantic Stroop task with the n-back task produced a change in the distributional profile of semantic Stroop interference, which we ascribe to a general difficulty in the use of proactive control. Our findings suggest that semantic Stroop interference is, to some extent, dependent on the available executive resources, while also being sensitive to subtle variations in task conditions.

Distributional analyses reveal the polymorphic nature of the Stroop interference effect: It's about (response) time

The study addressed the still-open issue of whether semantic (in addition to response) conflict does indeed contribute to Stroop interference (which along with facilitation contributes to the overall Stroop effect also known as Congruency effect). To this end, semantic conflict was examined across the entire response time (RT) distribution (as opposed to mean RTs). Three (out of four) reported experiments, along with cross-experimental analyses, revealed that semantic conflict was absent in the participants' faster responses. This result characterizes Stroop interference as a unitary phenomenon (i.e., driven uniquely by response conflict). When the same participants' responses were slower, Stroop interference became a composite phenomenon with an additional contribution of semantic conflict that was statistically independent of both response conflict and facilitation. While the present findings allow us to account for the fact that semantic conflict has not been consistently found in past studies, further empirical and theoretical efforts are still needed to explain why exactly it is restricted to longer responses. Indeed, since neither unitary nor composite models can account for this polymorphic nature of Stroop interference on their own, the implications for the current state of theory are outlined.

Meta-Analysis of Social Presence Effects on Stroop Task Performance

In this paper, we conducted a meta-analytic review to examine the impact of social presence on individuals' performance on the Stroop task, shedding light on the cognitive processes underlying social facilitation. We followed PRISMA guidelines to identify and include 33 relevant studies in a multivariate random-effects meta-analysis. Our results show that social presence reliably modulates Stroop interference (a measure of cognitive control); specifically, participants exhibit lower Stroop interference when performing the task in the presence of others compared to performing it in isolation. We also found that the strength of the effect varies depending on the type of social presence: it is stronger with an attentive audience compared to an inattentive one, and null with an evaluative audience. Additionally, different features of the Stroop task itself moderate the effect; the effect is stronger for the classic version of the task compared to the semantic version, and for experiments that use mixed within-block trials compared to those with homogenous blocks. We also observed a negative relationship between the number of trials and the magnitude of the effect. Overall, these findings provide insights into the mechanisms by which the presence of others affects performance on the Stroop task, and how they align with social facilitation theories.