Figure 1
Proportion congruency effects in the Stroop task as predicted by different accounts.
Figure 2
Pattern of proportion congruency (PC) effects under specific conditions corresponding to the models’ predictions (mean RTs; whiskers represent ±1 SE).
Table 1
Fit indices (BIC: Bayes Information Criterion, Log likelihood: 2-LL) for different models predicting RTs on the basis of both episodic retrieval of responses and control states (full model), and from models in which one or both sets of predictors were dropped.
| PREDICTORSA | BIC | 2-LL |
|---|---|---|
| full model: C, B, C × B, RR, CR, C × CR | 523,114,60 | 523,093.29 |
| w/o retrieval of control states: C, B, C × B, RR | 523,129.96 | 523,108.64 |
| w/o retrieval of responses: C, B, C × B, CR, C × CR | 523,560.78 | 523,539.46 |
| simple model: C, B, C × B | 524,177.80 | 524,156.49 |
[i] a C: congruency (current trial), B: block type (mostly congruent/incongruent), RR: response relation (between the current trial and the last occurrence of the distractor word), CR: congruency relation (between the current trial and the last occurrence of the distractor word).