Cargando…
The Stroop Task Sex Difference: Evolved Inhibition or Color Naming?
Previous research shows that women outperform men in the classic Stroop task, but it is not known why this difference occurs. There are currently two main hypotheses: (1) women have enhanced verbal abilities, and (2) women show greater inhibition. In two Stroop experiments, we examined the Inhibitio...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9859918/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36261735 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10508-022-02439-9 |
_version_ | 1784874465564295168 |
---|---|
author | Sjoberg, Espen A. Wilner, Raquel G. D’Souza, Antonia Cole, Geoff G. |
author_facet | Sjoberg, Espen A. Wilner, Raquel G. D’Souza, Antonia Cole, Geoff G. |
author_sort | Sjoberg, Espen A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Previous research shows that women outperform men in the classic Stroop task, but it is not known why this difference occurs. There are currently two main hypotheses: (1) women have enhanced verbal abilities, and (2) women show greater inhibition. In two Stroop experiments, we examined the Inhibition hypothesis by adopting a procedure, often used in visual cognition paradigms, that induces a particular inhibitory component. So-called Negative Priming occurs when a distracting non-target stimulus on one trial becomes the target on the following trial. Results from our experiments showed that the degree to which this type of inhibition occurs within the Stroop effect is no different for men and women. This was the case irrespective of whether participants made a vocal response (Experiment 1; n = 64, 32 men and 32 women) or a manual response (Experiment 2; n = 64, 32 men and 32 women). These results do not therefore support the Inhibition hypothesis. We additionally review findings from a range of paradigms that can be seen as indexing the different components required for the Stroop task (e.g., distractor suppression). This review suggests that the sex effect is due to superior color naming ability in women. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9859918 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98599182023-01-22 The Stroop Task Sex Difference: Evolved Inhibition or Color Naming? Sjoberg, Espen A. Wilner, Raquel G. D’Souza, Antonia Cole, Geoff G. Arch Sex Behav Original Paper Previous research shows that women outperform men in the classic Stroop task, but it is not known why this difference occurs. There are currently two main hypotheses: (1) women have enhanced verbal abilities, and (2) women show greater inhibition. In two Stroop experiments, we examined the Inhibition hypothesis by adopting a procedure, often used in visual cognition paradigms, that induces a particular inhibitory component. So-called Negative Priming occurs when a distracting non-target stimulus on one trial becomes the target on the following trial. Results from our experiments showed that the degree to which this type of inhibition occurs within the Stroop effect is no different for men and women. This was the case irrespective of whether participants made a vocal response (Experiment 1; n = 64, 32 men and 32 women) or a manual response (Experiment 2; n = 64, 32 men and 32 women). These results do not therefore support the Inhibition hypothesis. We additionally review findings from a range of paradigms that can be seen as indexing the different components required for the Stroop task (e.g., distractor suppression). This review suggests that the sex effect is due to superior color naming ability in women. Springer US 2022-10-19 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9859918/ /pubmed/36261735 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10508-022-02439-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Paper Sjoberg, Espen A. Wilner, Raquel G. D’Souza, Antonia Cole, Geoff G. The Stroop Task Sex Difference: Evolved Inhibition or Color Naming? |
title | The Stroop Task Sex Difference: Evolved Inhibition or Color Naming? |
title_full | The Stroop Task Sex Difference: Evolved Inhibition or Color Naming? |
title_fullStr | The Stroop Task Sex Difference: Evolved Inhibition or Color Naming? |
title_full_unstemmed | The Stroop Task Sex Difference: Evolved Inhibition or Color Naming? |
title_short | The Stroop Task Sex Difference: Evolved Inhibition or Color Naming? |
title_sort | stroop task sex difference: evolved inhibition or color naming? |
topic | Original Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9859918/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36261735 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10508-022-02439-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sjobergespena thestrooptasksexdifferenceevolvedinhibitionorcolornaming AT wilnerraquelg thestrooptasksexdifferenceevolvedinhibitionorcolornaming AT dsouzaantonia thestrooptasksexdifferenceevolvedinhibitionorcolornaming AT colegeoffg thestrooptasksexdifferenceevolvedinhibitionorcolornaming AT sjobergespena strooptasksexdifferenceevolvedinhibitionorcolornaming AT wilnerraquelg strooptasksexdifferenceevolvedinhibitionorcolornaming AT dsouzaantonia strooptasksexdifferenceevolvedinhibitionorcolornaming AT colegeoffg strooptasksexdifferenceevolvedinhibitionorcolornaming |