Dissociating stimulus-stimulus and response-response effects in the Stroop task

The separate semantic and response competition interactions between colour and word processing in a manual Stroop task were evaluated by comparing three trial types. Identity trials are both semantically compatible and response compatible (e.g., BLUE in the colour blue), different response trials are both semantically incompatible and response incompatible (e.g., BLUE in the colour green, where blue and green have different response keys), and same response trials are semantically incompatible and response compatible (e.g., the word BLUE in the colour red, where blue and red have the same key press response). ink colours were embedded in two different word types, colour words, and colour associates. The results using colour words replicated the findings of De Houwer (2003) and demonstrated both a semantic effect (a difference between same response trials and identity trials) and response competition (a difference between same response trials and different response trials). in contrast, the results using colour associates provided evidence for only a semantic effect. These findings support interpretations of the colour associate Stroop effect that attribute the effect to semantics, but challenge Klein's (1964) response competition account and Sharma and McKenna's (1998) claim that the effect of colour associates is dependent on verbal responding. The results confirm that the Stroop colour-word task appears to involve at least two mechanisms, a semantic mechanism and a response competition mechanism