THE BLUE STRAWBERRY AND A GIANT MOUSE? STROOP EFFECT IN ASSESSMENT OF INTERFERENCE CONTROL IN PREREADING CHILDREN

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24919/2313-2094.4/36.98642

Keywords:

interference control, inhibitory control, Stroop effect, cognitive development, preschool age

Abstract

The article presents theoretical introduction to the concept of a project which is aimed at preparation of set of tasks based on Stroop Effect, aimed at the diagnosis of the interference control in pre-reading children. Interference control depicts the ability to react adaptively while the perceptual conflict occurs. Interference control encompasses the ability to suppress a spontaneous/dominant response to the stimuli and to activate a response which is incongruent, non-automatic. For example, a person may be asked to name the real size of an animal which is printed in incongruent size (e.g. small mouse printed as large). The perceptual conflict results in most of examined persons latencies in response execution. The concept of interference control and methods of diagnosis of interference control in prereding children are discussed.

Better explanation of etiology of impulsive behaviors, deficits in attention, chaotic and unpredicted behaviors of children pose a challenge for contemporary developmental psychologists and clinicians. This problem stands in a complementary relationship to the tenets of educational psychology, preschool pedagogy, forming part of the processes of education, instruction and learning. Familiarity with the problem of interference control developmental patterns helps to create suitable conditions of education and instruction which allow teachers and parents to help children to acquire adaptive and well-organized behaviors which are important both for education and socialization. Acquiring strategies to cope with distractors is important when a child should focus attention on relevant instead of irrelevant facets of different mental tasks. Effective inhibitory processes are crucial in interpersonal functioning during problem solving, conflicts resolution and cooperation with others. It is assumed that project’s results may result in theoretical justification of methodical focus on training of inhibitory processes in kindergartens, with adequate techniques and didactic methods, as well as concise instructions for the parents.

Author Biography

Sara Filipiak, Maria Curie-Sklodowska University in Lublin (Poland).

Doctor, junior scientific assistant, Department of Psychology of Personality Development and Applied Psychology, Maria Curie-Sklodowska University in Lublin (Poland).

References

Archivald S.J., Kerns K.A. Identification and Description of New Tests of Executive Functioning in Children, Child Neuropsychology, 1999, 5, pp. 115 – 129.

Alvarez J.A., Emory E. Executive function and the frontal lobes: A metaanalytic review, Neuropsychology Review, 2006, 16, pp. 17 – 42.

Bower B. Brother Stroop’s enduring effect, Science News, 1992, 141, 19, pp. 312 – 315.

Catale C., Meulemans T. The Real Animal Size Test (RAST): A new measure of inhibitory control for young children, European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 2009, 25, 2, pp. 83 – 91.

Carlson S.M. Developmentally sensitive measures of executive function in preschool children, Developmental Neuropsychology, 2005, 28, 2, pp. 595 – 616.

Durgin F.H. The reverse Stroop Effect, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2000, 7, 1, pp. 121 – 125.

Friedman N.P., Miyake A. The Relations Among Inhibition and Interference Control Functions: A Latent-Variable Analysis, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2004, 133, 1, pp. 101 – 135.

Heij W.L., Boelens H., Kuipers J.R. Object interference in children’s colour and position naming: Lexical interference or taskset competition?, Language and Cognitive Processes, 2010, 25, 4, pp. 568 – 588.

Ikeda Y., Okuzumi H., Kokobun M. Age-related trends of stroop-like interference in animal size tests in 5-to 12-year-old children and young adults, Child Neuropsychology, 2013, 19, 3, pp. 276 – 291.

Kagan J., Lemkin J. Form, color, and size in children’s conceptual behavior, Child Development, 1961, 32, 1, pp. 25 – 28.

Killikelly C., Szücs D. The development of interference control: A pliot study using the manual colour word stroop paradigm, Procedia. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2010, 2, pp. 4842 – 4847.

Kochanska G., Tjebkes T.L., Forman D.R. Children’s emerging regulation of conduct: Restraint, compliance, and internalization from infancy to the second year, Child Development, 1998, 69, pp. 1378 – 1389.

Okuzumi H., Ikeda Y., Otsuka N., Saito R., Oi Y., Hirata S., Haishi K., Kokobun M. Stroop-Like Interference in the Fruit Stroop Test in Typical Development, Psychology, 2015, 6, pp. 643 – 649.

Lezak M.D. Neuropsychological Assessment (Third Edition). – New York : Oxford University Press, 1995, pp. 1 – 1000

Liu Q., Zhu X., Ziegler A., Shi J. The effects of inhibitory control training for preschoolers on reasoning ability and neural activity, Scientific Reports, 2015, 5, pp. 1 – 10.

Macleod C.M. Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review, Psychological Bulletin, 1991, 109, pp. 163 – 203.

Prevor M.B., Diamond A. Color-Object Interference in Young Children. A Stroop Effect in Children 31/2 – 61/2 Years Old, Cognitive Development, 2005, 20, pp. 256 – 278.

Santostefano S. Cognitive controls and exceptional states in children, Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1964, 20, 2, pp. 213 – 218.

Stroop R. Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1935, 18, pp. 643 – 662.

Siegel A.W., Vance B.J. Visual and haptic dimensional preference: A developmental study, Developmental Psychology, 1970, 3, 2, pp. 264 – 266.

Wright B.C., Wanley A. Adult’s versus children’s performance on the Stroop task: interference and facilitation, British Journal of Psychology, 2003, 94, 4, pp. 475 – 485.

Downloads

Published

2017-04-11

Issue

Section

Статті