English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The well-known Stroop effect is usually attributed to the automaticity of word reading. Recently, Wühr and Waszak (2003) had participants name the color of one of two rectangles and found that words in the relevant object produced larger Stroop effects than did words in the irrelevant object or in the background. They attributed this difference to an object-based mechanism of attentional selection that amplifies processing of all the features of an attended object. However, in the displays used by Wühr and Waszak, occlusion suggested the presence of different depth planes. Hence, the increased Stroop effect could have resulted from perceiving the words to be in the same depth plane as the relevant object and not from perceiving the words to be parts of the relevant object. Two experiments tested between these accounts by using displays without monocular depth cues. The results of both experiments replicate those of Wühr and Waszak, supporting their object-based account.

Depth cues do not underlie attentional modulations of the Stroop effect