Top

Gepubliceerd in:

01-04-2025 | Research

Age-related changes in attentional selection: revealing processes underlying the degradation of task set quality

Auteurs: Mariana Burca, Nabil Hasshim, Pierre Chausse, David Clarys, Ludovic Ferrand, François Maquestiaux, Benjamin A. Parris, Laetitia Silvert, Maria Augustinova

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 2/2025

Abstract

The present study further explored the age-related changes in attentional selection, first reported by Jackson and Balota Jackson and Balota (Psychology and Aging 28:3, 2013). To this end, response stimulus interval (RSI) was manipulated in in a Stroop paradigm that allows to isolate different components of the overall Stroop effect. The originally reported reduction of the overall Stroop effect in short (vs. long) RSI was successfully replicated. In line with the original claim that the ability to maintain the relevant task set consistently across time is preserved in older adults, this reduction failed to interact again with age – a null result that was uniquely supported in the present study with Bayesian evidence. Although healthy aging affected all components of the overall Stroop effect, the present study further identified interference and a disproportionally larger semantic conflict effect, as being the primary mechanisms behind the larger overall Stroop effect that older adults produce compared to younger adults. These results therefore directly fuel the original conclusion of Jackson and Balota Jackson and Balota (Psychology and Aging 28:3, 2013) that age-related differences in attentional selection are due the degradation of task set quality, namely a lesser ability of older adults to control interference. The present study additionally showed this reduced control of interference directly and identified where in the processing stream it occurs. The immediate implication that challenges the dominant unitary models of Stroop performance, is that future interventions designed to boost interference control in older adults should most likely target semantic, as opposed to response conflict.

vorige artikel The effect of response inhibition on the aftereffects of completed prospective memory

volgende artikel The presence of the reverse distance effect depends on the familiarity of the sequences being processed

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

See Dalryple-Alford & Budayr, 1966, for the first demonstration of significantly faster color-identification of congruent compared color-neutral Stroop stimuli that Dalryple-Alford (1972) referred to as facilitation (see Fig. 1).

If each color-word is presented in all the incongruent colors an equal number of times, it generates twice as much DR than SR trials.

See raw RTs in Table 1 for descriptive purposes only as the Stimulus × RSI interaction on raw RTs remained non-significant [F(3,603) = 2.27; p =.107, η_p² = 0.11; BF₁₀ = 0.044/BF₀₁ = 22.77], as in the original study of Jackson and Balota (2013).

This reduction might not necessarily involve that of the Stroop interference and of its different components (i.e., semantic and response conflicts).

Algom, D., Fitousi, D., & Chajut, E. (2022). Can the Stroop effect serve as the gold standard of conflict monitoring and control? A conceptual critique. Memory & Cognition, 50(5), 883–897. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-021-01251-5CrossRef

Augustinova, M., Silvert, L., Spatola, N., & Ferrand, L. (2018). Further investigation of distinct.

Bench, C. J., Frith, C. D., Grasby, P. M., Friston, K. J., Paulesu, E., Frackowiak, R. S. J., & Dolan, R. J. (1993). Investigations of the functional anatomy of attention using the stroop test. Neuropsychologia, 31(9), 907–922. https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(93)90147-RCrossRefPubMed

Brown, T. L. (2011). The relationship between Stroop interference and facilitation ef-fects: Statistical artifacts, baselines, and a reassessment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37(1), 85–99. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019252CrossRefPubMed

Bugg, J. M., DeLosh, E. L., Davalos, D. B., & Davis, H. P. (2007). Age differences in Stroop interference: Contributions of general slowing and task-specific deficits. Aging Neuropsychology and Cognition, 14(2), 155–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/138255891007065CrossRef

Burca, M., Chausse, P., Ferrand, L., Parris, B. A., & Augustinova, M. (2022). Some further clarifications on age-related differences in the Stroop task: New evidence from the two-to-one Stroop paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 29, 492–500. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-021-02011-xCrossRef

Cohen, J. D., Dunbar, K., & McClelland, J. L. (1990). On the control of automatic pro-cesses: A parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect. Psychological Review, 97(3), 332. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.97.3.332CrossRefPubMed

Components of Stroop interference And of their reduction by short response-stimulus intervals. Acta Psychologica, 189, 54–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ACTPSY.2017.03.009

Dalrymple-Alford, E. C. (1972). Associative facilitation and interference in the Stroop color-word task. Perception & Psychophysics, 11(4), 274–276. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210377CrossRef

Dalrymple-Alford, E. C., & Budayr, B. (1966). Examination of some aspects of the Stroop color-word test. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 23, 1211–1214. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1966.23.3f.1211CrossRefPubMed

De Houwer, J. (2003). On the role of stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus compatibility in the Stroop effect. Memory & Cognition, 31(3), 353–359. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194393CrossRef

De Jong, R., Berendsen, E., & Cools, R. (1999). Goal neglect and inhibitory limitations: Dissociable causes of interference effects in conflict situations. Acta Psychologica, 101(2–3), 379–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-6918(99)00012-8CrossRefPubMed

Faust, M. E., Balota, D. A., Spieler, D. H., & Ferraro, F. R. (1999). Individual differences in information-processing rate and amount: Implications for group differences in response latency. Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 777–799. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.777CrossRefPubMed

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior research methods, 41(4), 1149–1160.

Glaser, W. R., & Glaser, M. O. (1989). Context effects in stroop-like word and picture processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118(1), 13–42. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-3445.118.1.13

Goldfarb, L., & Henik, A. (2007). Evidence for task conflict in the Stroop effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33(5), 1170–1176. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.33.5.1170CrossRefPubMed

Hasshim, N., & Parris, B. A. (2014). Two-to-one color-response mapping and the presence of semantic conflict in the Stroop task. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1157. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01157CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hasshim, N., & Parris, B. A. (2021). The role of contingency and correlation in the Stroop task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74(10), 1657–1668. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218211032548CrossRef

Henson, R. N., Eckstein, D., Waszak, F., Frings, C., & Horner, A. J. (2014). Stimulus–response bindings in priming. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(7), 376–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2014.03.004CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hershman, R., & Henik, A. (2020). Pupillometric contributions to deciphering Stroop conflicts. Memory & Cognition, 48(2), 325–333. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-019-00971-zCrossRef

Hommel, B. (2004). Coloring an action: Intending to produce color events eliminates the Stroop effect. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 68(2–3), 74–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-003-0146-5CrossRefPubMed

Jackson, J. D., & Balota, D. A. (2013). Age-related changes in attentional selection: Quality of task set or degradation of task set across time? Psychology and Aging, 28(3), 744. https://doi.org/10.1037/A0033159CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Kalanthroff, E., Davelaar, E. J., Henik, A., Goldfarb, L., & Usher, M. (2018). Task conflict and proactive control: A computational theory of the Stroop task. Psychological Review, 125(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000083CrossRefPubMed

Killikelly, C., & Szűcs, D. (2013). Asymmetry in stimulus and response conflict processing across the adult lifespan: ERP and EMG evidence. Cortex; a Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior, 49(10), 2888–2903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2013.08.017CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Lee, M. D., & Wagenmakers, E. J. (2014). Bayesian modeling for Cognitive Science: A practical course. Cambridge University Press.

Li, K. Z. H., & Bosman, E. A. (1996). Age differences in stroop-like interference as a function of semantic relatedness. Aging Neuropsychology and Cognition, 3(4), 272–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/13825589608256630CrossRef

Lien, M. C., Allen, P. A., Ruthruff, E., Grabbe, J., McCann, R. S., & Remington, R. W. (2006). Visual word recognition without central attention: Evidence for greater automaticity with advancing age. Psychology and Aging, 21(3), 431–447. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.21.3.431CrossRefPubMed

Logan, G. D., & Zbrodoff, N. J. (1979). When it helps to be misled: Facilitative effects of increasing the frequency of conflicting stimuli in a Stroop-like task. Memory and Cognition, 7, 166–174. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197535CrossRef

MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109(2), 163–203. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.109.2.163CrossRefPubMed

MacLeod, C. M., & MacDonald, P. A. (2000). Interdimensional interference in the Stroop effect: Uncovering the cognitive and neural anatomy of attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(10), 383–391.

Martinon, L., Ferrand, L., Burca, M., Hasshim, N., Lakhzoum, D., Parris, B. A., Silvert, L., & Augustinova, M. (2024). Variations in response speed reveal the polymorphic nature of the Stroop Effect. Memory and Cognition, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-024-01538-3

Martinon, L.M., Ferrand, L., & Burca, M. (2024). Distributional analyses reveal the polymorphic nature of the Stroop interference effect: It’s about (response) time. Mem Cogn, 52, 1229–1245. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-024-01538-3

Melara, R. D., & Algom, D. (2003). Driven by information: A tectonic theory of Stroop effects. Psychological Review, 110(3), 422–471. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.422CrossRefPubMed

Nasreddine, Z. S., Phillips, N. A., Bédirian, V., Charbonneau, S., Whitehead, V., Collin, I., Cummings, J. L., & Chertkow, H. (2005). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: A brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53(4), 695–699. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.xCrossRefPubMed

New, B., Pallier, C., Brysbaert, M., & Ferrand, L. (2004). Lexique 2: A new French lexical database. Behavior Research Methods Instruments & Computers, 36(3), 516–524. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195598CrossRef

Nicosia, J., Cohen-Shikora, E. R., & Balota, D. A. (2021). Re-examining age differences in the Stroop effect: The importance of the trees in the forest (plot). Psychology and Aging, 36(2), 214214–214231. https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000599CrossRef

Parris, B. A., Hasshim, N., Wadsley, M., Augustinova, M., & Ferrand, L. (2022). The loci of Stroop effects: A critical review of methods and evidence for levels of processing contributing to color-word Stroop effects and the implications for the loci of attentional selection. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 86(4), 1029–1053. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-021-01554-xCrossRefPubMed

Parris, B. A., Hasshim, N., Ferrand, L., & Augustinova, M. (2023). Do Task sets compete in the Stroop Task and other selective attention paradigms? Journal of Cognition, 6(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.272CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Phaf, R. H., Van Der Heijden, A. H. C., & Hudson, P. T. W. (1990). SLAM: A connectionist model for attention in visual selection tasks. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 273–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(90)90006-PCrossRefPubMed

Roelofs, A. (2003). Goal-referenced selection of verbal action: Modeling attentional control in the Stroop task. Psychological Review, 110(1), 88–125. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.110.1.88CrossRefPubMed

Ruthruff, E., & Lien, M. C. (2016). Aging and attention. In N. Pachana (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Geropsychology. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-080-3_227-1

Salthouse, T. A. (1990). Working memory as a processing resource in cognitive aging. Developmental Review, 10(1), 101–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-2297(90)90006-PCrossRef

Schmidt, J. R., & Weissman, D. H. (2016). Congruency sequence effects and previous response times: Conflict adaptation or temporal learning? Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 80(4), 590–607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-015-0681-xCrossRefPubMed

Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-prime user’s guide. Psychology Software Tools. Inc.

Seymour, P. H. (1977). Conceptual encoding and locus of the Stroop effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 29(2), 245–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640747708400601CrossRefPubMed

Spieler, D. H., Balota, D. A., & Faust, M. E. (1996). Stroop performance in healthy younger and older adults and in individuals with dementia of the Alzheimer’s type. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22(2), 461–479. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.22.2.461CrossRefPubMed

Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18(6), 643–662. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054651CrossRef

Task Psychonomic Bulletin and Review.

West, R. L. (1996). An application of prefrontal cortex function theory to cognitive aging. Psychological Bulletin, 120(2), 272. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.120.2.272CrossRefPubMed

West, R., & Schwarb, H. (2006). The influence of aging and frontal function on the neural correlates of regulative and evaluative aspects of cognitive control. Neuropsychology, 20(4), 468–481. https://doi.org/10.1037/0894-4105.20.4.468CrossRefPubMed

Zhang, H., & Kornblum, S. (1998). The effects of stimulus-response mapping and irrelevant stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus overlap in four-choice Stroop tasks with single-carrier stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.24.1.3CrossRefPubMed

Zhang, H., Zhang, J., & Kornblum, S. (1999). A parallel distributed processing model of stimulus–stimulus and stimulus–response compatibility. Cognitive Psychology, 38(3), 386–432. https://doi.org/10.1006/COGP.1998.0703CrossRefPubMed

Keha, E., Aisenberg-Shafran, D., Hochman, S., & Kalanthroff, E. (in press). Age-Related Differences in Information, but not Task Control in the Color-Word Stroop.

Titel: Age-related changes in attentional selection: revealing processes underlying the degradation of task set quality
Auteurs: Mariana Burca
Nabil Hasshim
Pierre Chausse
David Clarys
Ludovic Ferrand
François Maquestiaux
Benjamin A. Parris
Laetitia Silvert
Maria Augustinova
Publicatiedatum: 01-04-2025
Uitgeverij: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 2/2025
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-025-02087-3

Andere artikelen Uitgave 2/2025

Optimizing working memory assessment: development of shortened versions of complex spans, updating, and binding tasks

Open Access
Research

How does practice modulate fake-production costs in a basketball task? Analyses of frequency distributions and mixture effects

Open Access
Research

Transcoding number words to typed multi-digit numerals: revisiting the strange case in Arabic bilinguals

Open Access
Research

Open hands, large numbers: manual gestures influence random number generation

Open Access
Research

Meta-analytic evidence for the complex mechanisms underlying congruency sequence effect

Open Access
Research

Emotional states affect the degree of duration distortion more than distortion direction: a meta-analytic research

Review

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Welkom bij Scalda & Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Registreer

Login

Age-related changes in attentional selection: revealing processes underlying the degradation of task set quality

Abstract

Andere artikelen Uitgave 2/2025

Optimizing working memory assessment: development of shortened versions of complex spans, updating, and binding tasks

How does practice modulate fake-production costs in a basketball task? Analyses of frequency distributions and mixture effects

Transcoding number words to typed multi-digit numerals: revisiting the strange case in Arabic bilinguals

Open hands, large numbers: manual gestures influence random number generation

Meta-analytic evidence for the complex mechanisms underlying congruency sequence effect

Emotional states affect the degree of duration distortion more than distortion direction: a meta-analytic research

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Welkom bij Scalda & Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Registreer

Login

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Optimizing working memory assessment: development of shortened versions of complex spans, updating, and binding tasks

How does practice modulate fake-production costs in a basketball task? Analyses of frequency distributions and mixture effects

Transcoding number words to typed multi-digit numerals: revisiting the strange case in Arabic bilinguals

Open hands, large numbers: manual gestures influence random number generation

Meta-analytic evidence for the complex mechanisms underlying congruency sequence effect

Emotional states affect the degree of duration distortion more than distortion direction: a meta-analytic research