Not All Stroop-Type Tasks Are Alike: Assessing the Impact of Stimulus Material, Task Design, and Cognitive Demand via Meta-analyses Across Neuroimaging Studies

IF 5.4 2区 心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES Neuropsychology Review Pub Date : 2024-09-12 DOI:10.1007/s11065-024-09647-1
Veronika I. Müller, Edna C. Cieslik, Linda Ficco, Sandra Tyralla, Amir Ali Sepehry, Taraneh Aziz-Safaie, Chunliang Feng, Simon B. Eickhoff, Robert Langner
{"title":"Not All Stroop-Type Tasks Are Alike: Assessing the Impact of Stimulus Material, Task Design, and Cognitive Demand via Meta-analyses Across Neuroimaging Studies","authors":"Veronika I. Müller, Edna C. Cieslik, Linda Ficco, Sandra Tyralla, Amir Ali Sepehry, Taraneh Aziz-Safaie, Chunliang Feng, Simon B. Eickhoff, Robert Langner","doi":"10.1007/s11065-024-09647-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Stroop effect is one of the most often studied examples of cognitive conflict processing. Over time, many variants of the classic Stroop task were used, including versions with different stimulus material, control conditions, presentation design, and combinations with additional cognitive demands. The neural and behavioral impact of this experimental variety, however, has never been systematically assessed. We used activation likelihood meta-analysis to summarize neuroimaging findings with Stroop-type tasks and to investigate whether involvement of the multiple-demand network (anterior insula, lateral frontal cortex, intraparietal sulcus, superior/inferior parietal lobules, midcingulate cortex, and pre-supplementary motor area) can be attributed to resolving some higher-order conflict that all of the tasks have in common, or if aspects that vary between task versions lead to specialization within this network. Across 133 neuroimaging experiments, incongruence processing in the color-word Stroop variant consistently recruited regions of the multiple-demand network, with modulation of spatial convergence by task variants. In addition, the neural patterns related to solving Stroop-like interference differed between versions of the task that use different stimulus material, with the only overlap between color-word, emotional picture-word, and other types of stimulus material in the posterior medial frontal cortex and right anterior insula. Follow-up analyses on behavior reported in these studies (in total 164 effect sizes) revealed only little impact of task variations on the mean effect size of reaction time. These results suggest qualitative processing differences among the family of Stroop variants, despite similar task difficulty levels, and should carefully be considered when planning or interpreting Stroop-type neuroimaging experiments.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":"103 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-024-09647-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Stroop effect is one of the most often studied examples of cognitive conflict processing. Over time, many variants of the classic Stroop task were used, including versions with different stimulus material, control conditions, presentation design, and combinations with additional cognitive demands. The neural and behavioral impact of this experimental variety, however, has never been systematically assessed. We used activation likelihood meta-analysis to summarize neuroimaging findings with Stroop-type tasks and to investigate whether involvement of the multiple-demand network (anterior insula, lateral frontal cortex, intraparietal sulcus, superior/inferior parietal lobules, midcingulate cortex, and pre-supplementary motor area) can be attributed to resolving some higher-order conflict that all of the tasks have in common, or if aspects that vary between task versions lead to specialization within this network. Across 133 neuroimaging experiments, incongruence processing in the color-word Stroop variant consistently recruited regions of the multiple-demand network, with modulation of spatial convergence by task variants. In addition, the neural patterns related to solving Stroop-like interference differed between versions of the task that use different stimulus material, with the only overlap between color-word, emotional picture-word, and other types of stimulus material in the posterior medial frontal cortex and right anterior insula. Follow-up analyses on behavior reported in these studies (in total 164 effect sizes) revealed only little impact of task variations on the mean effect size of reaction time. These results suggest qualitative processing differences among the family of Stroop variants, despite similar task difficulty levels, and should carefully be considered when planning or interpreting Stroop-type neuroimaging experiments.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
并非所有的 Stroop-Type 任务都一样:通过神经影像研究的元分析评估刺激材料、任务设计和认知需求的影响
斯特罗普效应是认知冲突处理中最常被研究的例子之一。随着时间的推移,经典的 Stroop 任务出现了许多变体,包括采用不同刺激材料、控制条件、呈现设计以及与额外认知要求相结合的版本。然而,这些实验变体对神经和行为的影响从未得到过系统的评估。我们使用激活可能性荟萃分析法总结了有关 Stroop 任务的神经影像学研究结果,并研究了多重需求网络(前岛叶、外侧额叶皮层、顶内沟、上/下顶叶、扣带回皮层和前补充运动区)的参与是否可归因于解决所有任务所共有的某些高阶冲突,或者不同任务版本之间的差异是否会导致该网络的特殊化。在 133 项神经影像学实验中,颜色-文字 Stroop 变体中的不一致性处理始终征集多重需求网络区域,任务变体对空间聚合有调节作用。此外,在使用不同刺激材料的任务版本中,与解决类似 Stroop 干扰相关的神经模式也有所不同,颜色词、情绪图片词和其他类型刺激材料之间唯一的重叠区域是后内侧额叶皮层和右侧前脑岛。对这些研究中报告的行为(共 164 个效应大小)进行的后续分析表明,任务变化对反应时间平均效应大小的影响很小。这些结果表明,尽管任务难度相似,但 Stroop 变体系列之间存在质的加工差异,在计划或解释 Stroop 型神经影像实验时应仔细考虑这些差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Neuropsychology Review
Neuropsychology Review 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
1.70%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Neuropsychology Review is a quarterly, refereed publication devoted to integrative review papers on substantive content areas in neuropsychology, with particular focus on populations with endogenous or acquired conditions affecting brain and function and on translational research providing a mechanistic understanding of clinical problems. Publication of new data is not the purview of the journal. Articles are written by international specialists in the field, discussing such complex issues as distinctive functional features of central nervous system disease and injury; challenges in early diagnosis; the impact of genes and environment on function; risk factors for functional impairment; treatment efficacy of neuropsychological rehabilitation; the role of neuroimaging, neuroelectrophysiology, and other neurometric modalities in explicating function; clinical trial design; neuropsychological function and its substrates characteristic of normal development and aging; and neuropsychological dysfunction and its substrates in neurological, psychiatric, and medical conditions. The journal''s broad perspective is supported by an outstanding, multidisciplinary editorial review board guided by the aim to provide students and professionals, clinicians and researchers with scholarly articles that critically and objectively summarize and synthesize the strengths and weaknesses in the literature and propose novel hypotheses, methods of analysis, and links to other fields.
期刊最新文献
Cognitive Intra-individual Variability in Cognitively Healthy APOE ε4 Carriers, Mild Cognitive Impairment, and Alzheimer's Disease: a Meta-analysis. Measurement Error and Methodologic Issues in Analyses of the Proportion of Variance Explained in Cognition. Implementation of Cognitive (Neuropsychological) Interventions for Older Adults in Clinical or Community Settings: A Scoping Review. Verbal and Spatial Working Memory Capacity in Blind Adults and the Possible Influence of Age at Blindness Onset: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Reliability of Theory of Mind Tasks in Schizophrenia, ASD, and Nonclinical Populations: A Systematic Review and Reliability Generalization Meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1