Previous analyses of response time distributions have shown that the Stroop effect is observed in the mode (μ) and standard deviation (σ) of the normal part of the distribution, as well as its tail (τ). Specifically, interference related to semantic and response processes has been suggested to specifically affect the mode and tail, respectively. However, only one study in the literature has directly manipulated semantic interference, and none manipulating response interference. The present research aims to address this gap by manipulating both semantic and response interference in a manual response Stroop task, and examining how these components of Stroop interference affect the response time distribution. Ex-Gaussian analysis showed both semantic and response conflict to only affect τ. Analyzing the distribution by rank-ordered response times (Vincentizing) showed converging results as the magnitude of both semantic and response conflict increased with slower response times. Additionally, response conflict appeared earlier on the distribution compared to semantic conflict. These findings further highlight the difficulty in attributing specific psychological processes to different parameters (i.e., μ, σ, and τ). The effect of different response modalities on the makeup of Stroop interference is also discussed.

中文翻译：

---

手动响应Stroop任务中语义和响应干扰的响应时间分布分析。

先前对响应时间分布的分析表明，在分布的正态部分及其尾部（τ）的模式（μ）和标准偏差（σ）中观察到了Stroop效应。具体而言，已经提出了与语义和响应过程有关的干扰来分别分别影响模式和尾部。但是，文献中只有一项研究直接操纵了语义干扰，而没有操纵响应干扰。本研究旨在通过在手动响应Stroop任务中处理语义和响应干扰，并检查Stroop干扰的这些组件如何影响响​​应时间分布，来解决这一差距。前高斯分析表明语义冲突和响应冲突仅影响τ。通过按等级排序的响应时间（Vincentening）分析分布，结果表明收敛的结果是语义和响应冲突的幅度都随响应时间变慢而增加。此外，与语义冲突相比，响应冲突在分发中更早出现。这些发现进一步凸显了将特定心理过程归因于不同参数（即μ，σ和τ）的困难。还讨论了不同响应方式对Stroop干扰构成的影响。这些发现进一步凸显了将特定心理过程归因于不同参数（即μ，σ和τ）的困难。还讨论了不同响应方式对Stroop干扰构成的影响。这些发现进一步凸显了将特定心理过程归因于不同参数（即μ，σ和τ）的困难。还讨论了不同响应方式对Stroop干扰构成的影响。