Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Self Control in Society, Mind, and Brain$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Ran Hassin, Kevin Ochsner, and Yaacov Trope

Print publication date: 2010

Print ISBN-13: 9780195391381

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: May 2010

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195391381.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2017. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 18 December 2017

Using the Stroop Task to Study Emotion Regulation

Using the Stroop Task to Study Emotion Regulation

Chapter:
(p.93) CHAPTER 6 Using the Stroop Task to Study Emotion Regulation
Source:
Self Control in Society, Mind, and Brain
Author(s):

Jason Buhle

Tor Wager

Ed Smith

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195391381.003.0006

The Stroop task is among the most influential experimental paradigms for the study of cognitive control. Recent variants have sought to extend the Stroop task to the study of emotional regulation. To assess these emotional Stroop tasks, it is important to distinguish between those that seek to disrupt performance purely via distraction by emotional stimuli that engage attention, from those that do so by presenting emotional information that specifically conflicts with task-relevant judgments. The emotional stimuli in distraction-based Stroop tasks typically fail to disrupt the performance of healthy adults, and recent work suggests that when inference does occur, it lags behind goal-directed processing, primarily degrading performance on subsequent trials. Although early neuro-imaging research using the emotional distraction Stroop tasks gave rise to the influential hypothesis of distinct emotional and nonemotional processing regions in the anterior cingulate cortex, subsequent research has provided limited support. Other recent evidence suggests that interference in these distraction tasks might reflect a generic transient surprise rather than inherently emotional processes. In contrast to emotional distraction Stroop tasks, studies of emotional conflict have reported robust congruency effects, but it is unclear that the resolution of stimulus incompatibility is relevant to questions of how one controls one’s emotions. Future research with emotional distraction Stroop tasks should seek to develop variants that evince more robust effects, whereas research on emotional stimulus incompatibility should leverage previous work with nonemotional conflict Stroop variants to explore topics such as the relationship between output modality and dimensional relevancy, and the distinction between categorization and identification task goals.

Keywords:   cognitive control, interference, emotional control, Stroop task, emotional Stroop, anterior cingulate cortex, conflict, distraction

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .