COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY

EVALUATING HEMISPHERIC
SPECIALIZATION THROUGH
STROOP TASK

Submitted by:

Mungcal, Meriam

Vargas, Mary Mel R.

Concepcion, Kent

Submitted to:

Prof. Melvin Carreon

I. Objective of the Study

The current study aims to evaluate the differences of the left and right cerebral
hemispheres in perceiving colors and words through stroop task. in line with this, the
researchers seek to answer the following specific questions:

1. Is there significant differences in the reaction time among the three conditions both
eyes open, left eye close and right eye close?

2. Is there significant difference in the reaction time of male and female participants in
the stroop task?

II. Background of the Study

Rationale of Conducting this Quasl-Experimental Study

Attention refers to an internal state that can be rapidly modified by instructions. In

practical terms, it means that observers respond differently to the same stimulus
depending on their attentional state. Spatial attention generally refers to a focus area
where performance on some task is better than outside of that focus area.

Introduction

Stroop task is a text used to test the human brain in terms of color recognition and reaction
time. The Stroop effect is a phenomenon that occurs when you must say the color of a word
but not the name of the word .The text has been used to test cognition among male and
female. The purpose of this experiment is to assess differences in gender performance
among male and female on the Stroop interference effect. It can assess an individual's
cognitive processing speed, attentional capacity, and the level of cognitive control. These
skillls and facets are implicit in so many ways in which interact with the world, suggesting
that this test reveals a brief yet incisive view into human thoughts and behavior. And also
to the three condition of both eyes open, left eye close and right eye close.
Review of Related Literature

The Stroop effect is one of the best known phenomena in all of cognitive science and indeed in
psychology more broadly. It was named after John Ridley Stroop who discovered this occurrence in
the 1930s. Stroop created three classic experimental research theories, while conducting the
experiments with a group of participants. The first theory compared reading a list of words in black
ink with reading the same list of words printed in different colours. The results showed that there
was little or no difference in the time it took to read from both lists. He then compared the naming
of colours for a list of solid colour squares with the naming of colours for a list of words printed in
different colours. His participants took longer to name ink colours of different words. His
experiments showed that the action of reading was automatic for most people. He demonstrated
that when the brain was instructed to do the opposite and pay more attention to the colour of a
word it struggled. His participants had to intentionally adjust their responses to complet e the
new task, as it is not as familiar to us as reading is. This phenomenon is called “interference”. His
experimental results showed that people are more practiced at word reading than naming
colours, there is less interference with word reading than there is with naming colours. As learnt
experiences become part of our memory, it teaches us over time that the meaning of words holds
greater significance than the colours they are written in. (Miller, 2014)

The extensive literature regarding gender differences in the Stroop Test has been inconclusive (for
review, see MacLeod, 1991). For every study that reported significant gender difference, there
seemed to be one that claimed otherwise. Even so, there is a tendency for females to perform
superior to male. Still other studies reported that women were quicker on the Stroop color-word
card test than men were (Sarmany, 1977). There is a widespread agreement among researchers
(Golden, 1974; Sarmany,1977) that females tend to have shorter latency on the color card, while
males and females perform almost equally on the word card. The differences between men and
women in processing body shapes and body weight stimuli, utilizing the Stroop Test to assess the
intensity of attitudes, were examined by Ben-Tovim, Walker and Douros (1993) using 30
volunteers (15 men and 15 women). The analysis yielded no significant differences between men
and women in latency of naming the color of words which were related to being fat.On the color-
word card (interference card), many researchers reported no significant difference between males
and females for latency of naming of color words (Alansari, 1990; Bone & Eysenck, 1972; Naish,
1980; Peretti, 1969; Singh, 1991; Stroop, 1935; Waber, 1976).
III. Materials

- Mobile phone
- Eye patch
- Paper and pen

IV. Procedures

- Download color test (stroop task) on the mobile phone.

- Conduct the test on five male and five female participants. Get two trials for each
participant and record the mean for the three different conditions: both eyes open, left eye
close, right eye close

V. Presentation of Results

Table 1. The Mean of Male Participant on the Three Different Conditions

MALE Both Eye Open Left Eye Close Right Eye Close

Jame Zedrick 7.88295 13.5821 11.1467

Bryan 9.6983 10.41 10.4741

Theo 10.9739 10.5901 10.198

Ruther 13.85 10.83 11.11

MJ 9.24 10.0645 9.5255

Table 2. The Mean of Female Participant on the Three Different Conditions

FEMALE Both Eye Open Left Eye Close Right Eye Close

Marenz 10.376 10.1689 10.8232

Cherry 17.29 10.35 11.78

Yeye 10.17 12.83 10.80

Kayla 11.5485 12.1465 12.3593

Marisse 11.0675 9.82055 11.991

ONE-WAY ANOVA

The table we used to conclude about the overall effect of the independent variable. It shows Sig. =
.909 < 0.05 our conclusion is to retain the Ho.

T-TEST FOR INDEPENDENT SAMPLE MEANS OF BOTH EYE

T-TEST FOR INDEPENDENT SAMPLE MEANS OF LEFT EYE

The table shows that t = .039 and that Sig. (2-tailed) .970 tailed. Since .970 > 0.05, you conclude by
retaining H0 and not affirming H1.

T-TEST FOR INDEPENDENT SAMPLE MEANS OF RIGHT EYE

This table shows that t = - 1.586 and that Sig. (2-tailed) .151 tailed. Since .151 > 0.05, you conclude
by retaining H0 and not affirming H1.

VI. Discussion

The different patterns were found in the collected data, the overall difference between the
participants was found not to be statistically significant. From the results of the test, it was
realized that the values were very close and had no statistical difference. In table 1 show
the participant general weighted mean. One-way Anova was used to conduct, if there is
significant relationship among the three different condition and Independent sample T-test is also
used to distinguish if there significant difference among the reaction time of the both genders .
Based on data showed that sig. 2 tailed is greater than critic value 0.05 the researcher conclude
that there is no significant relationship among the three different condition and reaction time of the
both gender then reject the null hypothesis.

VII. Conclusion

Gender differences were examined in the speed of processing, in the context of a Stroop
colour-word task. Overall, the Stroop interference effect was observed. Word-reading was
faster than colour-naming. Response times were much slower when naming the colour of
incongruent colour words than series of Xs. Female participants seemed to respond faster
in naming colours of incongruent colour words than males. In contrast, female and male
participants performed equally in the word-reading and colour-naming tasks. The findings
are insufficient to substantiate gender difference in the Stroop interference effect. There is
no significant difference in the reaction time of male and female participants and also in the three
conditions both eyes open, left eye close and right eye close in the stroop task.

VIII. Reference

Alansari, B. M. (1990). Cognitive style approaches. Unpublished manuscript. From Aberdeen

University, Scotland.

Ben-Tovim, D., Walker, M., & Douros, G. (1993). Failure to demonstrate gender differences in
interference to information-processing of body-shape stimuli. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 76,456-
458.

Bone, R. N., & Eysenck, H. J. (1972). Extraversion, field dependence, and the Stroop Test. Perceptual
and Motor Skills, 34, 873-874.
Cherry, K. (2012). Education Psychology: The Stroop effect: How to create your own Stroop effect
experiment. Retrieved from http://psychology.about.com/library/bl-stroopeffect.htm

Golden, C. (1974). Sex differences in performance on the Stroop Color and Word Test. Perceptual
and Motor Skills, 39, 1067-1070

Macleod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrated review.
Psychological Bulletin, 109, 163-203

Miller, R. (2014) The Stroop Effect - Mind Games or an Illusion? Retrieved from
https://d2l.deakin.edu.au/d2l/eP/presentations/presentation_preview_popup.d2l?presId=67655&
fbclid=IwAR19vyHoJFIjVFMQFGnl6X8PMisF7nKkTh9VPtUCN_brazUNfCbtE5KQTKI

Naish, P. (1980). Phonological recording and the Stroop effect. British Journal of Psychology, 71,
395-400.

Peretti, P. (1969). Cross-sex and cross-educational level performance in a color-word interference

task. Psychonomic Science, 16, 321-323.

Singh, S. P. (1991). Sex differences in cognitive functioning. Psycho-Lingua, 21, 47-50.

Waber, D. P. (1976). Sex differences in cognition: A function of maturation rate. Science, 192, 572-
573.