IndexIntroductionMethodsParticipantsMaterialsProcedureResultsDiscussionWorks CitedIntroductionThe Stroop Color and Word Test effect on its basis is one of the best-known and most enduring phenomena in all of cognitive science and psychology. First reported by John Ridley Stroop in 1935, the phenomenon explains the degree of difficulty people have in naming the color of ink rather than the word itself (Stroop, 1935). More specifically, it evaluates the ability to inhibit cognitive interference, which occurs when the processing of one stimulus feature influences the simultaneous processing of another attribute of the same stimulus (Scarpini & Tagini, 2017). Since the dawn of experimental psychology, it has been found that clear words are faster to read than objects or their properties to name. A study conducted in 1886 introduced the concept of automatism into cognitive science, explaining that word reading counts as an unconscious automatic process due to extensive practice (MacLeod, 1991). According to this concept, people cannot comply with the instruction not to read because reading itself cannot be turned on and off. That's why incompatible words are guaranteed to cause interference when trying to name printed colors. In the following report, subjects are asked to read three different tables of information as quickly as possible. Two of them are represented as a congruent condition in which participants are asked to read the names of colors in text printed in black ink and name different colored blocks without text. In contrast, the last test is the Stroop effect test, in which colored words are printed with an inconsistent color tone. Therefore, this is considered an incongruent condition as participants are asked to name the ink color instead of reading the text. Although this experiment is mainly used for the purpose of measuring the ability to inhibit cognitive interference, similar research has also found applications to measure other cognitive functions such as attention, processing speed and cognitive flexibility. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay In this report, two main hypotheses that testify to the three experiments will be analyzed. Hypothesis one predicts that completing the word task is significantly faster than the colored block test. The other hypothesis states that participants will take longer to complete the Stroop task than the colored blocks task. The focus of the study is on the speed of completion of each task and the various cognitive functions that influence it.MethodsParticipantsA selected number of 138 (N = 138) university students enrolled in PY1102 subjects, with a gender breakdown of 40 males and 98 females was qualified to participate in the research. The experiments were conducted during the assigned tutorial hours. The mean (M) value of the age of the participants was calculated as 24.19 years along with a standard deviation (SD) of 9.54 years. Materials A stimulus and response card along with a stopwatch were used to conduct the experiment. The stimulus and response card provided contained exactly the same instructions and consisted of three different tests that needed to be completed. Procedure The experiment consisted of three separate tests conducted to measure the consistency and speed with which each task was completed relative to the other. All three experiments were used to also identify cognitive functions in terms of inhibitionexecution of overbearing responses and some interference that occurred. The first evaluation sequence was based on a word reading test. Participants were provided with a sheet consisting of different colors in basic text format. Instructions were given that each participant was to read the list of words aloud as quickly as possible, starting from left to right and from top to bottom. The experimenter used a separate answer sheet to manually score the amount of errors and the time taken to complete them. Following the provided experimental paradigm, the second part of the experiment asked participants to identify and name the colored blocks without text in rapid successions. The test followed similar phases to task one, but with a clear change in stimulus provided. Again, a separate answer sheet was used to track progress and identify errors that occurred. The last part of the experiment consisted of the classic Stroop task on color words. The task was presented on a sheet of paper and showed successive red, blue, green, and yellow words in all four different font colors on a white background. Each trial was presented as congruent (e.g., “red” written in its original color) or incongruent (e.g., “green” written in a different color). Participants were tasked with identifying and pronouncing the color of the ink and ignoring the meaning of the word present. The results were scored based on the previous two experiments, and any errors that occurred were resolved during the process. Results The descriptive values ​​identified in the results showed that the Word task (M = 7.62, SD = 1.61) was completed at a faster rate than the Word task (M = 7.62, SD = 1, 61) Color block activity (M=9.12, SD=2.03) and Stroop activity (M=17.12, SD=5.47). The inferential comparison between the Word task and the colored block task (t(df) = -9.39, p-value = 0.000) and the colored block task versus the Stroop task (t(df) = - 19.34, p-value = 0.000) had a constant p-value regardless of any differences. The value of the degrees of freedom (t(df)), however, presented the indicator that the colored block test when compared with the word test achieves a much greater value when conversely contrasted with the Stroop task. Discussion At the end of the experimental phase, the results together with the previously examined studies emerged in support of the formulated hypotheses. Performance parameters of speed and accuracy were both emphasized across all three experimental designs, highlighting no methodological conflicts. In support of the first hypothesis, as expected, the results of the Word Task were found to indicate a shorter time interval than the Colored-block Task (p < 0.001). Hypothesis two was also supported as the results showed that the colored blocks task was completed substantially faster than the Stroop task (p < 0.001). To predict the outcome of the hypotheses, inferential statistics were used to make inferences based on the relationships found in the sample. Descriptive statistics was also used to validate and compare the sample size results through calculating the mean value along with the standard deviation. According to studies with Italian normative data conducted by Amato and Caffarra, the results were identified as influenced by the participant's attention functioning and general cognitive efficiency. Regarding the Stroop task, the slowdown in response conflict was identified as due, 25(3), 545-559.