Does the stroop effect decrease with imagery?

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 34 Sayı: 6, 785 - 795, 31.12.2024

Fatih Bal

https://doi.org/10.54005/geneltip.1495419

Öz

Background/Aims: This study examines the effect of imagery on the Stroop effect, which measures interference effects on attention.
Methods: The Stroop task requires participants to identify the colour of a word while disregarding its meaning. The study group consisted of 40 participants who underwent 14 weeks of imagery sessions, each lasting 90 minutes. The data collected was analysed using SPSS 25 software, and statistical tests such as the Mann-Whitney U Test and the Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test were used to compare pre-test and post-test results.
Results: The findings suggest that the imagery study has a positive effect in reducing the Stroop effect.
Conclusions: Therefore, it is concluded that the imagery method can be effective in reducing interference in attention. However, further research is recommended to validate these results.

Anahtar Kelimeler

imgeleme, dikkat, stroop testi, stroop etkisi

Stroop etkisi görüntülerle birlikte azalır mı?

Öz

Arka Plan/Amaç: Bu çalışma, imgelemenin dikkat üzerindeki girişim etkilerini ölçen Stroop etkisi üzerindeki etkisini incelemektedir.
Yöntemler: Stroop görevi, katılımcıların anlamını göz ardı ederek bir kelimenin rengini belirlemelerini gerektirir. Çalışma grubu, 14 hafta boyunca her biri 90 dakika süren imgeleme seanslarına tabi tutulan 40 katılımcıdan oluşmuştur. Toplanan veriler SPSS 25 programı kullanılarak analiz edilmiş, ön test ve son test sonuçlarının karşılaştırılmasında Mann-Whitney U Testi ve Wilcoxon İşaretli Sıralama Testi gibi istatistiksel testler kullanılmıştır.
Bulgular: Bulgular, imgeleme çalışmasının Stroop etkisini azaltmada olumlu bir etkiye sahip olduğunu göstermektedir.
Sonuç: Dolayısıyla imgeleme yönteminin dikkatteki etkileşimi azaltmada etkili olabileceği sonucuna varılmıştır. Ancak bu sonuçları doğrulamak için daha fazla araştırma yapılması önerilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

imgeleme, dikkat, stroop testi, stroop etkisi

Kaynakça

• 1. MacLeod C.M. Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review. Psychological bulletin 1991; 109(2), 163.
• 2. Ben-Haim MS, Williams P, Howard Z, Mama Y, Eidels A, Algom D. (2016). The emotional Stroop task: assessing cognitive performance under exposure to emotional content. Journal of visualized experiments: JoVE 2016; 29(112), 53720.
• 3. Kindt M, Bierman D, Brosschot JF Stroop versus Stroop: Comparison of a card format and a single-trial format of the standard color-word Stroop task and the emotional Stroop task. Personality and Individual Differences 1996; 21(5), 653-661.
• 4. Moritz S, Fischer BK, Hottenrott B, Kellner M, Fricke S, Randjbar S, Jelinek L. Words may not be enough! No increased emotional Stroop effect in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Behavior Research and Therapy 2008; 46(9), 1101-1104.
• 5. Innes R, Todd J. Modeling distraction: how stimulus-driven attention capture influences goal-directed behavior. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2022; 34(10), 1972-1987.
• 6. Lamers MJ, Roelofs A, Rabeling-Keus IM. Selective attention and response set in the Stroop task. Memory & Cognition 2010; 38(7), 893-904.
• 7. Stroop JR. Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1935; 18, 643-661.
• 8. Kiyonaga A, Egner T. The working memory Stroop effect: When internal representations clash with external stimuli. Psychological Science 2014; 25(8), 1619-1629.
• 9. Hatukai T, Algom D. The Stroop incongruity effect: Congruity relationship reaches beyond the Stroop task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2017; 43(6), 1098.
• 10. Jensen AR, Rohwer Jr WD. The Stroop color-word test: a review. Acta Psychologica 1966; 25, 36-93.
• 11. Golden CJ. Identification of brain disorders by the Stroop Color and Word Test. Journal of Clinical Psychology 1976; 32(3), 654-658.
• 12. Besner D. The myth of ballistic processing: Evidence from Stroop’s paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2001; 8, 324-330.
• 13. MacKay DG, Shafto M, Taylor JK, Marian DE, Abrams L, Dyer JR. Relations between emotion, memory, and attention: Evidence from taboo Stroop, lexical decision, and immediate memory tasks. Memory & Cognition 2004; 32, 474-488.
• 14. MacLeod CM, MacDonald PA. Interdimensional interference in the Stroop effect: Uncovering the cognitive and neural anatomy of attention. Trends in cognitive sciences 2000; 4(10), 383-391.
• 15. Krebs RM, Boehler CN, Woldorff MG. The influence of reward associations on conflict processing in the Stroop task. Cognition 2010; 117, 341-347.
• 16. Raz A, Iniguez MM, Martin L, Zhu H. Suggestion overrides the Stroop effect in highly hypnotizable individuals. Consciousness and Cognition 2007; 16, 331-338.
• 17. Tassi P, Muzet A. Defining the states of consciousness. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 2001; 25(2), 175-191.
• 18. Hall H. Hypnosis revisited. Skeptical Inquirer 2021; 45(2), 17-19.
• 19. Brunel J, Mathey I, Colombani S, Delord S. Modulation of attentional bias by hypnotic suggestion: experimental evidence from an emotional Stroop task. Cognition and Emotion 2023; 115, 1-8.
• 20. Fromm E, Shor RE. Hypnosis: Developments in research and new perspectives. New York: Routledge; 2017.
• 21. Kirsch I. Clinical hypnosis as a nondeceptive placebo: empirically derived techniques. The American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis 1994; 37(2), 95-106.
• 22. Barber TX, Glass LB. Significant factors in hypnotic behavior. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1962; 64, 222-228.
• 23. Lynn S, Fassler O, Knox J. Hypnosis and the altered state debate: something more or nothing more? Contemporary Hypnosis. 2005; 22, 39-45.
• 24. Segi S. Hypnosis for pain management, anxiety, and behavioral disorders. The Clinical Advisor: For Nurse Practitioners 2012; 15(3), 80.
• 25. Lynn S, Krackow E, Loftus EF, Locke TG, Lilienfeld SO. Constructing the past: problematic memory recovery techniques in psychotherapy. In Lilienfeld, S.O, Lynn, S., Lohr, J.M. (Eds.). Science and pseudoscience in clinical psychology. New York: Guilford Press; 2014. p. 245-275.
• 26. Terhune DB, Cleeremans A, Raz A, Lynn SJ. Hypnosis and top-down regulation of consciousness. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2017; 81, 59-74.
• 27. Dienes Z. Is hypnotic responding to the strategic relinquishment of metacognition? In Beran, M., Brandl, J.L., Perner, J., & Proust, J. (Eds.), Foundations of metacognition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2012. p. 267-277.
• 28. Lau H, Rosenthal D. Empirical support for higher-order theories of conscious awareness. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2011; 15, 365-373.
• 29. Palfi B, Parris BA, Collins AF, Dienes Z. Strategies that reduce Stroop interference. Royal Society Open Science. 2022; 9(3), https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.202136
• 30. Bressler D, Rossman M. Interactive guided imagery in treating chronic pain. Pain management: A practical guide for clinicians. 2002; 833-844.
• 31. Campbell-Gillies L. Guided imagery as treatment for anxiety and depression in breast cancer patients: a pilot study. South Africa: University of Johannesburg; 2008.
• 32. Braffman W, Kirsch I. Imaginative suggestibility and hypnotizability: An empirical analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1999; 77, 578-587.
• 33. Hilgard ER, Tart CT. Responsiveness to suggestions following waking and imagination instructions and following induction of hypnosis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology. 1966; 71, 196-208.
• 34. Campbell DT, Stanley JC. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Ravenio Books; 2015.
• 35. Chaloner K, Verdinelli I. Bayesian experimental design: A review. Statistical Science, 1995; 273-304.
• 36. Hyman R. Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings (book). Journal of Personality Assessment 1982; 46(1), 96-97.
• 37. Lezak MD, Howieson DB, Loring DW, Fischer JS. Neuropsychological assessment. Oxford University Press, USA; 2004.
• 38. Karakaş S, Erdoğan E, Sak L, Soysal AŞ, Ulusoy T, Ulusoy İY, Alkan S. Stroop Testi TBAG Formu: Türk kültürüne standardizasyon çalışmaları, güvenirlik ve geçerlik. Klinik Psikiyatri. 1999; 2(2), 75-88.
• 39. Jensen AR. Scoring the Stroop Test. Acta Psychologica. 1965; 24(5), 398-408.
• 40. Holmes J. The therapeutic imagination. Routledge; 2014.
• 41. McNiff S. Art as medicine: Creating a therapy of the imagination. Shambhala Publications; 1992.
• 42. Raz A, Kirsch I, Pollard J, Nitkin YK (2006). Suggestion reduces the Stroop effect. Psychological Science. 2002; 17, 91-95.
• 43. Raz A, Shapiro T, Fan J, Posner MI, Hypnotic suggestion and the modulation of Stroop interference. Archives of General Psychiatry. 2002; 59(12):, 1155-1161.
• 44. Chan RW, Van der Lubbe RH, Immink M, Verwey W. Individualised COgnitive and Motor learning for the Elderly (ICOME): A guiding framework for enhancing motor learning performance. 2023; https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/dhb9g
• 45. Macrae CN, Christian BM, Miles LK. Imagination and behavioral control. In Forgas P, & Harmon-Jones E. (Eds.), Motivation and Its Regulation. London: Psychology Press; 2014. p. 79-94
• 46. Forgas JP. On the regulatory functions of mood: Affective influences on memory, judgments, and behavior. Motivation and Its Regulation 2014, 169-192.
• 47. Casiglia E, Schiff S, Facco E, Gabbana A, Tikhonoff V, Schiavon L, Bascelli A,… Amodio P. (2010). Neurophysiological correlates of post-hypnotic alexia: A controlled study with Stroop test. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis. 52(3), 219-233.
• 48. Sheehan PW, Donovan P, MacLeod CM. Strategy manipulation and the Stroop effect in hypnosis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 1988; 97(4), 455.
• 49. Zahedi A, Stuermer B, Hatami J, Rostami R, Sommer W. Eliminating Stroop effects with post-hypnotic instructions: Brain mechanisms inferred from EEG. Neuropsychologia, 2017; 96, 70-77.
• 50. Egner T, Jamieson G, Gruzelier J. Hypnosis decouples cognitive control from conflict monitoring processes of the frontal lobe. Neuroimage 2005; 27(4), 969-978.
• 51. Zahedi A, Abdel Rahman R, Stürmer B, Sommer W. Common and specific loci of Stroop effects in vocal and manual tasks, revealed by event-related brain potentials and posthypnotic suggestions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2019; 148(9), 1575.
• 52. Bench C, Frith CD, Grasby PM, Friston KJ, Paulesu E, Frackowiak RSJ, Dolan RJ. Investigations of the functional anatomy of attention using the Stroop test. Neuropsychologia 1993; 31(9), 907-922.
• 53. Gallagher M, Schoenbaum G. Functions of the amygdala and related forebrain areas in attention and cognition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1999; 877(1), 397-411.
• 54. Raz A, Moreno-Íniguez M, Martin L, Zhu H. Suggestion overrides the Stroop effect in highly hypnotizable individuals. Consciousness and Cognition 2007; 16(2), 331-338.
• 55. Parris B, Hasshim N, Zoltan D. Look into my eyes: Pupillometry reveals that a posthypnotic suggestion for word blindness reduces Stroop interference by marshaling greater effortful control. EJN. 2021; 53(8), 2819-2834.
• 56. MacLeod CM., Sheehan PW. Hypnotic control of attention in the Stroop task: a historical footnote. Consciousness and Cognition. 2003; 12, 347-353.