4.5 Article

Intermodal Priming of Cognitive Conflict? A Failed Replication of Mager et al. (2009)

期刊

FRONTIERS IN HUMAN NEUROSCIENCE
卷 15, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2021.680885

关键词

priming; cognitive conflict; stroop-task; cognitive control; replication

资金

  1. Bamberg University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present study failed to replicate the astonishing concept of conflict priming reported in previous work and does not open the doors for a new window on sequences of conflicts. Nevertheless, the failed replication is valuable for future research, since it demonstrated that Conflict Priming as a facilitation of processing of conflict trials following deviant tones, is not a confirmed finding.
Introduction: The present study was conducted to verify a promising experimental setup which demonstrated an inversed Stroop-effect (much faster responses for incongruent relative to congruent Stroop trials) following a mismatching tone. In the matching condition, which was an almost exact replication of the original study, participants were required to indicate whether word color and word meaning were matching, whereas in the response conflict condition, instruction was the same as in a classical Stroop task and required the participants to respond to the word color. As in the original study, each trial was preceded by a sine tone which was deviant in pitch in 20% of the trials. Results: The main result was that the Stroop effect was not inversed after deviant tones, neither under the matching task instruction nor under the response conflict task instruction. The Stroop effect was unaffected by the previous conceptual mismatch. Conclusion: The current study failed to replicate the astonishing concept of conflict priming reported in previous work and does not open the doors for a new window on sequences of conflicts. Nevertheless, the failed replication is valuable for future research, since it demonstrated that Conflict Priming as a facilitation of processing of conflict trials following deviant tones, is not an confirmed finding.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据