Publication: Item-specific adaptation and the conflict-monitoring hypothesis: A computational model
All || By Area || By Year| Title | Item-specific adaptation and the conflict-monitoring hypothesis: A computational model | Authors/Editors* | C. Blais, S. Robidoux, E. Risko, D. Besner |
|---|---|
| Where published* | Psychological Review |
| How published* | Journal |
| Year* | 2007 |
| Volume | 114 |
| Number | 4 |
| Pages | 1076-1086 |
| Publisher | American Psychological Association |
| Keywords | Automatism; Cognitive Processes; Conflict; Monitoring; Stroop Effect; Human; conflict monitoring; control; Stroop; automatic processes |
| Link | http://search2.scholarsportal.info/ids70/gateway.php?mode=pdf&doi=10.1037%2F0033-295X.114.4.1076&db=psycinfo-set-c&s1=187bd25f29b2bd7ac72a37eb7ea36339&s2=3a58b08baab85bdbcc9f34ec7ee4f034 |
| Abstract |
Comments on articles by Botvinick et al. (see record 2001-07628-005) and Jacob et al. (see record 2003-09165-012). M. M. Botvinick, T. S. Braver, D. M. Barch, C. S. Carter, and J. D. Cohen (2001) implemented their conflict-monitoring hypothesis of cognitive control in a series of computational models. The authors of the current article first demonstrate that M. M. Botvinick et al.'s (2001) conflict-monitoring Stroop model fails to simulate L. L. Jacoby, D. S. Lindsay, and S. Hessels's (2003) report of an item-specific proportion-congruent (ISPC) effect in the Stroop task. The authors then implement a variant of M. M. Botvinick et al.'s model based on the assumption that control must be able to operate at the item level. This model successfully simulates the ISPC effect. In addition, the model provides an alternative to M. M. Botvinick et al.'s explanation of the list-level proportion-congruent effect in terms of an ISPC effect. Implications of the present modeling effort are discussed. |
Back to page 61 of list