articleJournal of Experimental Psychology GeneralJan 1, 2003GREEN OA

Working-memory capacity and the control of attention: The contributions of goal neglect, response competition, and task set to Stroop interference.

University of North Carolina at Greensboro · Georgia Institute of Technology

PubMed
Indexed incrossrefpubmed

Abstract

Individual differences in working-memory (WM) capacity predicted performance on the Stroop task in 5 experiments, indicating the importance of executive control and goal maintenance to selective attention. When the Stroop task encouraged goal neglect by including large numbers of congruent trials (RED presented in red), low WM individuals committed more errors than did high WM individuals on the rare incongruent trials (BLUE in red) that required maintaining access to the "ignore-the-word" goal for accurate responding. In contrast, in tasks with no or few congruent trials, or in high-congruency tasks that followed low-congruency tasks, WM predicted response-time interference. WM was related to latency, not…

Citation impact

1,722
total citations
FWCI
17.14
Percentile
100%
References
135
Citations per year

Authors

2

Topics & keywords

Keywords
  • Stroop effect
  • Working memory
  • Cognitive psychology
  • Psychology
  • Neglect
  • Task (project management)
  • Set (abstract data type)
  • Attentional control
No related works found for this paper.