A study to investigate the relationship between the Stroop Interference Task and a Self-
Monitoring Task.
Jack Powell
Abstract
The Stroop Interference Task is named after J. Ridley Stroop who discovered this task in 1935. The
task seeks to observe the delay in reaction time between congruent and incongruent stimuli. In our
experiment, 177 participants were required to respond to the colour of the word while ignoring its
meaning. Congruent trials involved the colour of the word being the same as its meaning. Whereas
incongruent trials involved the colour of the word differing from its meaning. Furthermore, the
experiment aimed to investigate whether there was a relationship with Snyder and Gangestad’s
(1985) 18 question Self-Monitoring Task. Each participant did both conditions. The Stroop Task did
elicit a significant interference effect, but our results showed that there was no correlation between
the two tasks.
Introduction
Plan
Aim- To investigate the relationship between the Stroop task and the self-monitoring task.
What was the Stroop task? - Designed by J. Stroop in 1935. Delay in reaction time when processing
different words when printed as the same colour or a different colour.
What is the self-monitoring task? - 18 questions (Snyder, 1974) but was originally 25 (Snyder &
Gangestad., 1985). It was a set of personal reaction questions to test a person’s expressive
behaviour. Participants answered with either ‘true’ or ‘false’ to the questions/statements.
1
, Research- Those who score higher in the Self-Monitoring Task will do better on the Stroop task.
Better cognitively and pay more attention. However, our findings do not correlate with this.
Hypothesis- Those participants who score higher in the Self-monitoring task will make less mistakes
in the Stroop task- vice versa (will support Koch).
2
Monitoring Task.
Jack Powell
Abstract
The Stroop Interference Task is named after J. Ridley Stroop who discovered this task in 1935. The
task seeks to observe the delay in reaction time between congruent and incongruent stimuli. In our
experiment, 177 participants were required to respond to the colour of the word while ignoring its
meaning. Congruent trials involved the colour of the word being the same as its meaning. Whereas
incongruent trials involved the colour of the word differing from its meaning. Furthermore, the
experiment aimed to investigate whether there was a relationship with Snyder and Gangestad’s
(1985) 18 question Self-Monitoring Task. Each participant did both conditions. The Stroop Task did
elicit a significant interference effect, but our results showed that there was no correlation between
the two tasks.
Introduction
Plan
Aim- To investigate the relationship between the Stroop task and the self-monitoring task.
What was the Stroop task? - Designed by J. Stroop in 1935. Delay in reaction time when processing
different words when printed as the same colour or a different colour.
What is the self-monitoring task? - 18 questions (Snyder, 1974) but was originally 25 (Snyder &
Gangestad., 1985). It was a set of personal reaction questions to test a person’s expressive
behaviour. Participants answered with either ‘true’ or ‘false’ to the questions/statements.
1
, Research- Those who score higher in the Self-Monitoring Task will do better on the Stroop task.
Better cognitively and pay more attention. However, our findings do not correlate with this.
Hypothesis- Those participants who score higher in the Self-monitoring task will make less mistakes
in the Stroop task- vice versa (will support Koch).
2
