Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 21, 2026

Measuring Attention and Visual Processing Speed by Model-based Analysis of Temporal-order Judgments
Published on: January 23, 2017
No pupillometric evidence for effortful proactive control in the proportion-congruent Stroop paradigm
Nabil Hasshim1,2, Molly Carruthers2, Ludovic Ferrand3
1School of Health and Society, University of Salford, Salford, UK.
Abstract:
Cognitive control is the ability to allocate attention away from stimuli that are irrelevant to achieving a goal, towards stimuli that are. When conflict is anticipated, attention is biased in a global, top-down manner called proactive control and this effortful type of cognitive control is engaged before stimulus onset. The list-wise congruency proportion (LWPC) effect, where the Stroop congruency effect is reduced when there are more incongruent than congruent trials compared to vice versa, has been viewed as one of the prime signatures of this type of cognitive control. However, there has been recent debate about the extent to which this effect should be attributed to proactive control instead of alternative explanations such as simpler associative learning or reactive control. Thus, by using pupillometry (i.e., an indicator of cognitive effort), the present study investigated the extent to which LWPC effects result from effortful proactive control. Experiment 1 employed a classic proportion congruency manipulation, while Experiment 2 replaced congruent trials with neutral trials to control for potential effects of associative learning. While in line with past findings, proportion congruency effects were obtained in response times of both experiments and pupillometry showed both proportion congruency and Stroop effects after stimulus onset, no differences in pupil sizes were found during the preparatory phase. Therefore, these results do not support the idea that the observed LWPC effects are due to participants engaging in effortful proactive control.
Related Concept Videos
Reliability and Validity
Student t Distribution
The Student t distribution was developed by William S. Goset (1876–1937) of the...
Force Classification
Contact and non-contact forces are two of the most widely used categories of forces. As the name suggests, contact forces require physical contact between two objects to act upon each other. Examples of contact forces include frictional,...
Constraints and Statical Determinacy
Center of Gravity
To determine its location, the principle of moments can be utilized by dividing the object into...
Comparing Experimental Results: Student's t-Test

