Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 6, 2026

A Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate Interference in Working Memory by Distractions and Interruptions
Published on: July 16, 2015
Response interference in compatibility tasks
Vincent Berthet1, Jean-Luc Kop, Sid Kouider
1Laboratoire de Sciences Cognitives et Psycholinguistique Ecole Normale Supérieure - CNRS, Paris, France. vksberthet@gmail.com
Abstract:
Affective priming (AP) is a well-established phenomenon in which performance to a valenced target is typically better when it is preceded by an affectively congruent prime than when it is preceded by an incongruent prime. Several studies have emphasized a strong similarity between AP and Stroop suggesting that both are driven by response interference. The present study investigated this hypothesis by testing whether a general prediction of the response interference model was verified in the two tasks. This prediction refers to target strength and states that the size of compatibility effects should increase as the strength of the relevant information decreases. In four experiments, we show that this general prediction of the response interference model was verified in AP and Stroop when the strength of the relevant information was manipulated at the perceptual level (Experiments 1 and 2), while the opposite pattern was observed when this variable was manipulated at the semantic level (Experiments 3 and 4). While the results do not undermine the hypothesis that AP and Stroop effects are governed by response interference, they suggest that the model should be refined in order to account for differential effects of target strength in compatibility tasks.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Frustration and Conflict: Avoidance-Avoidance, Double-Approach Avoidance
Reliability and Validity
Frustration and Conflict: Approach-Approach, Approach-Avoidance
One common type of conflict is the Approach–Approach Conflict. In this case, a person faces two desirable options,...
Interference and Decay
Interference occurs when competing memories hinder the retrieval of particular information. It can be classified into two types: proactive and retroactive interference. Proactive...
Barriers to Effective Communication I
Communication barriers include the following:
Physiological barriers: They are limitations caused by a person's health condition or disability, such as hearing loss, poor eyesight, illness, or unconsciousness. An example to overcome this barrier...
Barriers to Effective Communication II
Cultural barriers:
Differences in values, beliefs, religion, knowledge, and tradition can significantly impact communication. Awareness of nonverbal cues is critical, especially when conversing with a patient from a different culture. What appears appropriate in one culture may be inappropriate in another.
Semantic barriers:
As a result of their tendency to use...

