Why It Is too Early to Lose Control in Accounts of Item-Specific Proportion Congruency Effects
Why It Is too Early to Lose Control in Accounts of Item-Specific Proportion Congruency Effects
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/a0019957
复制
发表时间：
2011-06-01
影响因子：
2.1
通讯作者：
Chanani, Swati
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bugg, Julie M.;Jacoby, Larry L.;Chanani, Swati
项目特异性比例一致性（ISPC）效应是指与大多数一致项目相比，大多数不一致项目的干扰减弱。Stroop文献中的一个争论涉及这种效应的机制。注意到比例一致性和偶然性之间的混淆，施密特和Besner（2008）认为ISPC效应完全基于偶然性。我们引入了一个更广泛的理论分析，指出了应急和项目特定的控制机制的贡献。我们的分析强调，比例一致性是不混淆与应急时，相关的尺寸功能的ISPC信号，并预测，应通过将信号从无关的相关尺寸转移到项目特定的控制证据。我们在一个图片-单词Stroop范式中检验这个预测。当相关尺寸作为ISPC信号时（实验1和2），获得了控制的证据。当不相关维度作为ISPC信号（实验3）时，偶然性可以解释ISPC效应。这些模式支持我们的理论分析，挑战一个纯粹的偶然帐户，并赞成包括控制的ISPC效应的帐户。
The item-specific proportion congruency (ISPC) effect is the finding of attenuated interference for mostly incongruent as compared to mostly congruent items. A debate in the Stroop literature concerns the mechanisms underlying this effect. Noting a confound between proportion congruency and contingency, Schmidt and Besner (2008) suggested that ISPC effects are entirely contingency based. We introduce a broader theoretical analysis that points to the contribution of both contingency and item-specific control mechanisms. Our analysis highlights that proportion congruency is not confounded with contingency when the relevant dimension functions as the ISPC signal, and predicts that evidence of item-specific control should be obtained by shifting the signal from the irrelevant to the relevant dimension. We examine this prediction in a picture-word Stroop paradigm. When the relevant dimension functions as the ISPC signal (Experiments 1 and 2), evidence of control is obtained. When the irrelevant dimension, functions as the ISPC signal (Experiment 3), contingencies can account for the ISPC effect. These patterns support our theoretical analysis, challenge a pure contingency account, and favor the inclusion of control in accounts of ISPC effects.