Presentation (Project) Title

Measuring Inhibition in 3-year-olds Using the Day-Night Stroop Task

Mentor Information

Darlene DeMarie (College of Education) & Jennifer Bugos (College of the Arts)

Presentation Format

Event

Abstract

The purpose of this literature review was to examine inhibition assessed in young children using the Day/Night Stroop task. A search of the literature resulted in 51 primary research papers administering the Day/Night Stroop task to three-year-old children. All studies were conducted between 2010 and February 2021. For this review, we created an Excel spreadsheet we compared procedures and results among studies and calculated the percentage of studies that included different stimuli type, number of stimuli administered, administration of practice trials, and if so, how many practice trials, and attrition. Results show that some studies administered only one Stroop task trial in which the children were required to respond in an incongruent manner to the stimuli (i.e., say “day” to the moon picture and “night” to the sun picture). Other studies administered both the congruent and incongruent Stroop methods, administering the congruent method first, followed by the incongruent. However, none of the 51 studies returned back to the congruent way. We noted the relationship between the way tasks were administered and the results reported. It is important for future research to ensure understanding of the task prior to assessment and making conclusions about children’s skills.

Streaming Media

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 

Measuring Inhibition in 3-year-olds Using the Day-Night Stroop Task

The purpose of this literature review was to examine inhibition assessed in young children using the Day/Night Stroop task. A search of the literature resulted in 51 primary research papers administering the Day/Night Stroop task to three-year-old children. All studies were conducted between 2010 and February 2021. For this review, we created an Excel spreadsheet we compared procedures and results among studies and calculated the percentage of studies that included different stimuli type, number of stimuli administered, administration of practice trials, and if so, how many practice trials, and attrition. Results show that some studies administered only one Stroop task trial in which the children were required to respond in an incongruent manner to the stimuli (i.e., say “day” to the moon picture and “night” to the sun picture). Other studies administered both the congruent and incongruent Stroop methods, administering the congruent method first, followed by the incongruent. However, none of the 51 studies returned back to the congruent way. We noted the relationship between the way tasks were administered and the results reported. It is important for future research to ensure understanding of the task prior to assessment and making conclusions about children’s skills.