바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
사전등록 바로가기
 

logo

ISSN : 1226-9654

논문 상세

이전 다음
논문 투고

Vol.28 No.1

Citation Share

스트룹 비교과제에서 시행 내 및 시행 간 갈등순응

Intratrial and Intertrial Conflict Adaptation in the Stroop Comparison Task

한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물 / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2016, v.28 no.1, pp.157-175
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2016.28.1.008
김혜성 (연세대학교)
김민식 (연세대학교)
김혜성, & 김민식. (2016). 스트룹 비교과제에서 시행 내 및 시행 간 갈등순응. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 28(1), 157-175, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2016.28.1.008

초록

갈등 과제(conflict tasks)에서 이전 시행이 불일치 조건일 때 현재 시행의 일치 효과가 줄어드는 현상을 갈등순응이라고 한다(Gratton, Coles, & Donchin, 1992). 본 연구에서는 한 시행 내의 두 갈등의 처리에서 갈등순응이 일어나는지, 그리고 시행 내의 갈등 양상이 다음 시행에도 영향을 주는지를 알아보았다. 참가자들은 시행 내의 두 개의 스트룹 자극 중 하나의 의미 정보와 다른 하나의 잉크색 정보가 같은지 다른지를 판단하는 스트룹 비교과제를 수행하였다. 실험 1에서는 과제 관련 정보가 상이한 두 스트룹 자극을 시행 내에서 순차적으로 제시하고, 첫 번째 자극의 일치 여부에 따른 두 번째 자극에 의한 일치 효과를 측정하였다. 실험 결과, 첫 번째 스트룹 자극이 불일치 조건일 때 두 번째 스트룹 자극의 일치 효과가 감소하는 갈등순응이 나타났다. 실험 2에서는 두 개의 스트룹 자극을 동시에 제시하는 스트룹 비교과제를 실시하고 시행 간의 갈등순응을 관찰하였다. 시행 내의 두 스트룹 자극에 의한 갈등 양상은 각 자극의 잉크색과 의미의 관계에 따라 일치-일치, 일치-불일치, 불일치-일치, 불일치-불일치 조건 중에 하나에 해당되었다. 실험 결과, 이전 시행과 현재 시행의 갈등 양상이 동일한 경우에 현재 시행에서 반응시간이 감소하였다. 본 연구의 결과는 갈등순응효과가 두 개의 자극을 순차적으로 처리하여 반응해야하는 단일 시행 내에서도 일어나며, 시행 내의 복잡한 갈등 양상이 후속하는 시행의 갈등 순응에도 영향을 주고 있음을 새롭게 밝혔다는 점에서 의의가 있다.

keywords
갈등순응, 스트룹, 인지 통제, conflict adaptation, Stroop, cognitive control

Abstract

Conflict adaptation refers to a phenomenon in which the congruency effect decreases in an incompatible trial followed by the same incongruent trial in conflict tasks(Gratton & Donchin, 1992). This study measured whether conflict adaptation occurs upon the process of two conflicting stimuli within a trial, and whether a certain pattern of conflicts within a trial affects the performance in the next trial. The participants performed a Stroop comparison task, whrere they compared the meaning of one of the two presented Stroop words with the color of the other word. In Experiment 1, two Stroop words with distinctive task-relevant information were presented in sequence. The congruency effects of the second stimulus were analyzed as contingent on congruency of the previous stimuli. The results showed that the conflict adaptation effects which the second Stroop stimuli yielded reduced the congruency effect when the first Stroop word was incongruent. In Experiment 2, conflict adaptation between trials was observed when two Stroop words were shown simultaneously. The pattern of conflicts within a trial was one of four conditions determined by the relation with each stimulus’ congruency; congruent-congruent, congruent- incongruent, incongruent-congruent, and incongruent-incongruent. The results showed that the RT on current trials decreased when the pattern of conflicts in the current trial was identical to the previous trial. The complex pattern of conflicts generated by the previous trial affected the performance for the next trial. In conclusion, this study newly found the conflict adaptation within a single trial, which was sequentially processed and responded to two stimuli, and the effects of the complex pattern of the conflicts within a trial on the conflict adaptation in the following trial.

keywords
갈등순응, 스트룹, 인지 통제, conflict adaptation, Stroop, cognitive control

참고문헌

1.

김민식, 이도준, 민수정, 김가민 (2013). 작업기억 부하에 의한 방추상얼굴영역의 방해자극 관련 정보처리의 감소. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 25(1), 1-24.

2.

김상아, 조양석 (2013). 과제무관련 정보의 처리와 반응모드 사이의 처리억제를 통한 인지통제의 과정. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 25, 88-91.

3.

박영은, 조양석 (2015). 스트룹 과제에서 갑작스럽게 제시된 색단어의 주의 획득 효과. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 27(2), 77- 105.

4.

박태진, 박선희 (2011). 수반자극과제에서 정서가 초점주의에 미치는 영향. 인지과학, 22(4), 385-404.

5.

Braem, S., Abrahamse, E. L., Duthoo, W., & Notebaert, W. (2014). What determines the specificity of conflict adaptation? A review, critical analysis, and proposed synthesis. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(1134), 1-13.

6.

Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433-436.

7.

Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108(3), 624-652.

8.

Botvinick, M. M., Cohen, J. D., & Carter, C. S. (2004). Conflict monitoring and anterior cingulate cortex: An update. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(12), 539-546.

9.

Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(3), 371-396.

10.

Duthoo, W., Abrahamse, E. L., Braem, S., Boehler, C. N., & Notebaert, W. (2014). The heterogeneous world of congruency sequence effects: An update. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(1001), 1-9.

11.

Egner, T. (2008). Multiple conflict-driven control mechanisms in the human brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(10), 374-380.

12.

Egner, T., Delano, M., & Hirsch, J. (2007). Separate conflict-specific cognitive control mechanisms in the human brain. Neuroimage, 35(2), 940-948.

13.

Egner, T., & Hirsch, J. (2005). Cognitive control mechanisms resolve conflict through cortical amplification of task-relevant information. Nature Neuroscience, 8(12), 1784-1790.

14.

Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16(1), 143-149.

15.

Fernandez-Duque, D., & Knight, M. (2008). Cognitive control: Dynamic, sustained, and voluntary influences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34(2), 340-355.

16.

Fischer, R., Plessow, F., Kunde, W., & Kiesel, A. (2010). Trial-to-trial modulations of the Simon effect in conditions of attentional limitations: Evidence from dual tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36(6), 1576-1594.

17.

Funes, M. J., Lupiáñez, J., & Humphreys, G. (2010). Analyzing the generality of conflict adaptation effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36(1), 147-161.

18.

Gratton, G., Coles, M. G., & Donchin, E. (1992). Optimizing the use of information: Strategic control of activation of responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121(4), 480- 506.

19.

Goldfarb, L., & Henik, A. (2006). New data analysis of the Stroop matching task calls for a reevaluation of theory. Psychological Science, 17(2), 96-100.

20.

Han, S. W., & Kim, M. S. (2009). Do the contents of working memory capture attention? Yes, but cognitive control matters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35(5), 1292.

21.

Hommel, B., Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K. P. L. (2004). A feature-integration account of sequential effects in the Simon task. Psychological Research, 68(1), 1-17.

22.

Kerns, J. G., Cohen, J. D., MacDonald, A. W., Cho, R. Y., Stenger, V. A., & Carter, C. S. (2004). Anterior cingulate conflict monitoring and adjustments in control. Science, 303(5660), 1023-1026.

23.

Kim, C., Chung, C., & Kim, J. (2013). Task- dependent response conflict monitoring and cognitive control in anterior cingulate and dorsolateral prefrontal cortices. Brain Research, 1537, 216-223.

24.

Kim, S. Y., Kim, M. S., & Chun, M. M. (2005). Concurrent working memory load can reduce distraction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(45), 16524-16529.

25.

Kornblum, S. (1994). The way irrelevant dimensions are processed depends on what they overlap with: The case of Stroop-and Simon-like stimuli. Psychological Research, 56(3), 130-135.

26.

Lee, J., & Cho, Y. S. (2013). Congruency sequence effect in cross-task context: Evidence for dimension-specific modulation. Acta Psychologica, 144(3), 617-627.

27.

Mayr, U., Awh, E., & Laurey, P. (2003). Conflict adaptation effects in the absence of executive control. Nature Neuroscience, 6(5), 450-452.

28.

Notebaert, W., & Verguts, T. (2008). Cognitive control acts locally. Cognition, 106(2), 1071- 1080.

29.

Simon, J. R. (1969). Reactions toward the source of stimulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81(1), 174-176.

30.

Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18(6), 643-662.

31.

Tang, D., Hu, L., Li, H., Zhang, Q., & Chen, A. (2013). The neural dynamics of conflict adaptation within a look-to-do transition. PloS One, 8(2), e57912.

32.

Weissman, D. H., Jiang, J., & Egner, T. (2014). Determinants of congruency sequence effects without learning and memory confounds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(5), 2022-2037.

한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물

논문 투고 OA 정책