Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics
Volume 51, Issue 2 , Pages 135-142 , September 2010

Adult age differences in the Color Stroop Test: A comparison between an Item-by-item and a Blocked version

  • C. Ludwig

      Affiliations

    • Center for Interdisciplinary Gerontology, University of Geneva, Route de Drize 7, CH-1227 Carouge, Switzerland
    • Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Geneva, Boulevard du Pont d’Arve 40, CH-1205 Geneva, Switzerland
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author at: Center for Interdisciplinary Gerontology, University of Geneva, Route de Drize 7, CH-1227 Carouge, Switzerland. Tel.: +41 0 22 379 3783; fax: +41 0 22 379 3787.
    • ,
  • E. Borella

      Affiliations

    • Faculty of Psychology, University of Padua, Via Venezia 8, 35131 Padova, Italy
    • ,
  • M. Tettamanti

      Affiliations

    • Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Geneva, Boulevard du Pont d’Arve 40, CH-1205 Geneva, Switzerland
    • ,
  • A. de Ribaupierre

      Affiliations

    • Center for Interdisciplinary Gerontology, University of Geneva, Route de Drize 7, CH-1227 Carouge, Switzerland
    • Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Geneva, Boulevard du Pont d’Arve 40, CH-1205 Geneva, Switzerland

Received 28 April 2009 ,Revised 7 September 2009 ,Accepted 10 September 2009.

References 

  1. Aron AR. The neural basis of inhibition in cognitive control. Neuroscientist. 2007;13:214–228
  2. Barch DM, Carter CS, Hachten PC, Usher M, Cohen JD. The “benefits” of distractibility: mechanisms underlying increased Stroop effects in schizophrenia. Schizophr. Bull. 1999;25:749–762
  3. Basak C, Verhaeghen P. Subitizing speed, subitizing range, counting speed, the Stroop effect, and aging: capacity differences and speed equivalence. Psychol. Aging. 2003;18:240–249
  4. Bestgen Y, Van der Linden M. Effect of aging on interference and negative priming in the Stroop color-word task/Effet du vieillissement sur l’interference et l’amorcage negatif dans la tache de Stroop. Arch. Psychol. 2001;69:145–157
  5. Borella E, Delaloye C, Lecerf T, Renaud O, de Ribaupierre A. Do age differences between young and older adults in inhibitory tasks depend on the degree of activation of information?. Eur J. Cogn. Psychol. 2009;21:445–472
  6. Braver TS, Cohen JD. On the control of control: the role of dopamine in regulating prefrontal function and working memory. In:  Monsell S,  Driver J editor. Attention and Performance XVIII: Control of Cognitive Processes. Cambridge, MA, US: The MIT Press; 2000;p. 713–737
  7. Bruyer R, Scailquin J-C. Assessment of visuospatial short-term memory and effect of aging. Eur. Rev. Appl. Psychol. 1999;49:175–180
  8. Bruyer R, Scailquin JC. The fate of global precedence with age. Exp. Aging Res. 2000;26:285–314
  9. Cerella J. Aging and information-processing rate. In:  Birren JE,  Schaie KW editor. Handbook of the Psychology of Aging. 3rd ed.. San Diego, CA, USA: Academic Press; 1990;p. 201–221
  10. Cohen JD, Dunbar KO, McClelland JL. On the control of automatic processes: a parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect. Psychol. Rev. 1990;97:332–361
  11. Cohen JD, MacWhinney B, Flatt M, Provost J. PsyScope: an interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers. Behav. Res. Methods Instrum. Comput. 1993;25
  12. Cohn NB, Dustman RE, Bradford DC. Age-related decrements in Stroop Color Test performance. J. Clin. Psychol. 1984;40:1244–1250
  13. Comalli PEJ, Wapner S, Werner H. Interference effects of Stroop color-word test in childhood, adulthood, and aging. J. Genet. Psychol. 1962;100:47–53
  14. Craik FIM, Byrd M. Aging and cognitive deficits: the role of attentional resources. In:  Craik FIM,  Trehub S editor. Aging and Cognitive Processes. New York, NY, USA: Plenum Press; 1982;p. 191–211
  15. Dalrymple-Alford EC, Budayr B. Examination of some aspects of the Stroop Color-Word Test. Percept. Mot. Skills. 1966;23:1211–1214
  16. Davis ET, Fujawa G, Shikano T. Perceptual processing and search efficiency of young and older adults in a simple-feature search task: a staircase approach. J. Gerontol. B. Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 2002;57B:P324–P337
  17. de Frias CM, Dixon RA, Strauss E. Structure of four executive functioning tests in healthy older adults. Neuropsychology. 2006;20:206–214
  18. de Ribaupierre, A., Lecerf, T., Leutwyler, J., Poget, L., 1997. Mémoire de travail et attention sélective au cours du life-span (Final Report). Geneva: University of Geneva.
  19. de Ribaupierre A, Borella E, Delaloye C. Inhibition et variabilité individuelle: généralité ou spécificité des processus inhibiteurs/Inhibition and individual variability: generality or specificity of inhibitory processes. In:  Moutier S editors. Inhibition neurale et cognitive. Paris: Hermès; 2003;p. 103–124
  20. Delaloye C, Ludwig C, Borella E, Chicherio C, de Ribaupierre A. L’Empan de lecture comme épreuve mesurant la capacité de mémoire de travail: normes basées sur une population francophone de 775 adultes jeunes et âgés. Eur. Rev. Appl. Psychol. 2008;58:89–103
  21. Delaloye C, Moy G, Baudois S, De Bilbao F, Dubois Remund C, Hofer F, et al. The contribution of aging to the understanding of the dimensionality of executive functions. Arch. Gerontol. Geriatr. 2009;49:e51–e59
  22. Dempster FN. The rise and fall of the inhibitory mechanism: toward a unified theory of cognitive development and aging. Dev. Rev. 1992;12:45–75
  23. Dyer FN. The Stroop phenomenon and its use in the study of perceptual, cognitive, and response processes. Mem. Cogn. 1973;1:106–120
  24. Dyer FN, Severance LJ. Stroop interference with successive presentations of separate incongruent words and colors. J. Exp. Psychol. 1973;98:438–439
  25. Harnishfeger KK. The development of cognitive inhibition: theories, definitions, and research evidence. In:  Dempster FN,  Brainerd CJ editor. Interference and Inhibition in Cognition. San Diego, CA, USA: Academic Press; 1995;p. 175–204
  26. Hartley AA. Evidence for the selective preservation of spatial selective attention in old age. Psychol. Aging. 1993;8:371–379
  27. Hartman M, Hasher L. Aging and suppression: memory for previously relevant information. Psychol. Aging. 1991;6:587–594
  28. Hasher L, Quig M-B, May CP. Inhibitory control over no-longer-relevant information: adult age differences. Mem. Cogn. 1997;25:286–295
  29. Hasher L, Lustig C, Zacks RT. Inhibitory mechanisms and the control of attention. In:  Conway ARA,  Jarrold C,  Kane MJ,  Miyake A,  Towse JN editor. Variation in Working Memory. New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press; 2007;p. 227–249
  30. Homack S, Riccio CA. A meta-analysis of the sensitivity and specificity of the Stroop Color and Word Test with children. Arch. Clin. Neuropsychol. 2004;19:725–743
  31. Irving EL, Steinbach MJ, Lillakas L, Babu RJ, Hutchings N. Horizontal saccade dynamics across the human life span. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2006;47:2478–2484
  32. Kane MJ, Engle RW. Working-memory capacity and the control of attention: the contributions of goal neglect, response competition, and task set to Stroop interference. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 2003;132:47–70
  33. Kane MJ, Conway ARA, Hambrick DZ, Engle RW. Variation in working memory capacity as variation in executive attention and control. In:  Miyake A,  Kane MJ,  Conway ARA,  Jarrold C,  Towse JN editor. Variation in Working Memory. New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press; 2007;p. 21–46
  34. Kieley JM, Hartley AA. Age-related equivalence of identity suppression in the Stroop color-word task. Psychol. Aging. 1997;12:22–29
  35. Kindt M, Bierman D, Brosschot JF. Stroop versus Stroop: comparison of a card format and a single-trial format of the standard color-word Stroop task and the emotional Stroop task. Pers. Indiv. Diff. 1996;21:653–661
  36. Kindt M, Bierman D, Brosschot JF. Cognitive bias in spider fear and control children: assessment of emotional interference by a card format and a single-trial format of the Stroop task. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 1997;66:163–179
  37. Langenecker SA, Nielson KA, Rao SM. fMRI of healthy older adults during Stroop interference. Neuroimage. 2004;21:192–200
  38. Langley LK, Vivas AB, Fuentes LJ, Bagne AG. Differential age effects on attention-based inhibition: inhibitory tagging and inhibition of return. Psychol. Aging. 2005;20:356–360
  39. Li KZH, Bosman EA. Age differences in Stroop-like interference as a function of semantic relatedness. Aging Neuropsychol. Cogn. 1996;3:272–284
  40. Little DM, Hartley AA. Further evidence that negative priming in the Stroop color-word task is equivalent in older and younger adults. Psychol. Aging. 2000;15:9–17
  41. Lowe C, Rabbitt PMA. Test/re-test reliability of the CANTAB and ISPOCD neuropsychological batteries: theoretical and practical issues. Neuropsychologia. 1998;36:915–923
  42. Ludwig, C., 2005. Age differences in attentional control: a behavioral study. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland (available at http://www.unige.ch/cyberdocuments/theses2005/LudwigC/meta.html).
  43. Lustig C, May CP, Hasher L. Working memory span and the role of proactive interference. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 2001;130:199–207
  44. MacLeod CM. Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review. Psychol. Bull. 1991;109:163–203
  45. MacLeod CM, MacDonald PA. Interdimensional interference in the Stroop effect: uncovering the cognitive and neural anatomy of attention. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2000;4:383–391
  46. MacLeod CM, Dodd MD, Sheard ED, Wilson DE, Bibi U. In opposition to inhibition. In:  Ross BH editors. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation. San Diego, CA, USA: Academic Press; 2003;p. 163–214
  47. May CP, Hasher L. Synchrony effects in inhibitory control over thought and action. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 1998;24:363–379
  48. May CP, Hasher L, Stoltzfus ER. Optimal time of day and the magnitude of age differences in memory. Psychol. Sci. 1993;4:326–330
  49. McDowd JM, Oseas-Kreger DM, Filion DL. Inhibitory processes in cognition and aging. In:  Dempster FN,  Brainerd CJ editor. Interference and Inhibition in Cognition. San Diego, CA, USA: Academic Press; 1995;p. 363–400
  50. Melara RD, Algom D. Driven by information: a tectonic theory of Stroop effects. Psychol. Rev. 2003;110:422–471
  51. Milham MP, Erickson KI, Banich MT, Kramer AF, Webb A, Wszalek T, et al. Attentional control in the aging brain: insights from an fMRI study of the Stroop task. Brain Cogn. 2002;49:277–296
  52. Nigg JT. On inhibition/disinhibition in developmental psychopathology: views from cognitive and personality psychology and a working inhibition taxonomy. Psychol. Bull. 2000;126:220–246
  53. Olk B, Kingstone A. Why are antisaccades slower than prosaccades? A novel finding using a new paradigm. Neuroreport. 2003;14:151–155
  54. Panek PE, Rush MC, Slade LA. Locus of the age–Stroop interference relationship. J. Genet. Psychol. 1984;145:209–216
  55. Perlstein WM, Carter CS, Barch DM, Baird JM. The Stroop task and attention deficits in schizophrenia: a critical evaluation of card and single-trial Stroop methodologies. Neuropsychology. 1998;12:414–425
  56. Rabbitt PMA, Lowe C, Shilling VM. Frontal tests and models of cognitive ageing. Eur. J. Cogn. Psychol. 2001;13:5–28
  57. Rush BK, Barch DM, Braver TS. Accounting for cognitive aging: context processing, inhibition or processing speed?. Neuropsychol. Dev. Cogn. B. Aging Neuropsychol. Cogn. 2006;13:588–610
  58. Ryan JD, Shen J, Reingold EM. Modulation of distraction in aging. Br. J. Psychol. 2006;97:339–351
  59. Salo R, Henik A, Robertson LC. Interpreting Stroop interference: an analysis of differences between task versions. Neuropsychology. 2001;15:462–471
  60. Salthouse TA. The processing-speed theory of adult age differences in cognition. Psychol. Rev. 1996;103:403–428
  61. Salthouse TA, Meinz EJ. Aging, inhibition, working memory, and speed. J. Gerontol. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 1995;50B:297–306
  62. Schelstraete M-A, Hupet M. Cognitive aging and inhibitory efficiency in the Daneman and Carpenter's working memory task. Exp. Aging Res. 2002;28:269–279
  63. Seignourel PJ, Robins DL, Larson MJ, Demery JA, Cole M, Perlstein W. Cognitive control in closed head injury: context maintenance dysfunction or prepotent response inhibition deficit?. Neuropsychology. 2005;19:578–590
  64. Sevino, O., 1998. Les fonctions exécutives: évaluation et développement. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
  65. Shilling VM, Chetwynd A, Rabbitt PMA. Individual inconsistency across measures of inhibition: an investigation of the construct validity of inhibition in older adults. Neuropsychologia. 2002;40:605–619
  66. Spieler DH, Balota DA, Faust ME. Stroop performance in healthy younger and older adults and in individuals with dementia of the Alzheimer's type. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 1996;22:461–479
  67. Stroop JR. Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. J. Exp. Psychol. 1935;18:643–662
  68. Stuss DT, Floden D, Alexander MP, Levine B, Katz D. Stroop performance in focal lesion patients: dissociation of processes and frontal lobe lesion location. Neuropsychologia. 2001;39:771–786
  69. Tecce JJ, Dimartino M. Effects of heightened drive (shock) on performance in a tachistoscopic color-word interference task. Psychol. Rep. 1965;16:93–94
  70. Verhaeghen P, De Meersman L. Aging and the Stroop effect: a meta-analysis. Psychol. Aging. 1998;13:120–126
  71. Weir C, Bruun C, Barber T. Are backward words special for older adults?. Psychol. Aging. 1997;12:145–149
  72. West RL, Alain C. Age-related decline in inhibitory control contributes to the increased Stroop effect observed in older adults. Psychophysiology. 2000;37:179–189
  73. West RL, Baylis GC. Effects of increased response dominance and contextual disintegration on the Stroop interference effect in older adults. Psychol. Aging. 1998;13:206–217
  74. Zelazo PD, Craik FIM, Booth L. Executive function across the life span. Acta Psychol. (Amst.). 2004;115:167–183

PII: S0167-4943(09)00240-4

doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2009.09.040

Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics
Volume 51, Issue 2 , Pages 135-142 , September 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution