Executive effectiveness on Stroop type interference tasks. A validation study of a numerical and manual version (CANUM)

  • Francisco Gutiérrez-Martínez Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED)
  • Melchor Ramos-Ortega Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED)
  • José-Óscar Vila-Chaves Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED)
Keywords: Stroop task, attentional control, executive function, working memory capacity, general intelligence.


This paper presents CANUM, a new numerical and manual version of Stroop interference task. The stimulus used replaces the classical color-word conflict by the numerosity-number conflict considering the interference generated between the symbolic value of the number and the amount of times it is repeated. CANUM also replaces the vocal answer by a simple right-left typing. The aim was twofold: first, to ensure a general measure of attentional control capacity not linked to the verbal factor; and second, to extent the population to whom the test would be applied, avoiding the restrictions on reading ability inherent to the classical Stroop task. The results obtained in a sample of school children reveal a high reliability in terms of internal consistency, as well as a significant predictive validity in relation to two criterial measures: general intelligence and working memory. This supports its usefulness as an instrument for the assessment of executive function and controlled attention applicable in a wide age range, both for research purposes as for clinical and educational goals.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Francisco Gutiérrez-Martínez, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED)

Department of Devolpmental Psychology


José-Óscar Vila-Chaves, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED)

Department of Devolpmental Psychology



Algom, D., Dekel, A., & Pansky, A. (1996). The perception of number from the separability of the stimulus: The Stroop effect revisited. Memory & Cognition, 24, 557–572.

Baddeley, A. (1996). Exploring the central executive. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental. Psychology, 49 (1), 5-28.

Banich, M. T., Milham, M. P., Atchley, R., Cohen, N. J., Webb, A., Wszalek, T., et al. (2000). FMRI studies of Stroop tasks reveal unique roles of anterior and posterior brain systems in attentional selection. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 988–1000.

Bohnen, N., Twijnstra, A. & Jollies, J. (1992). Performance in the Stroop Color Word Test in relationship to the persistence of symptoms following mild head injury. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, 85, 16-121.

Bryant, P. (1996). Mathematical Understanding in the Nursery School Years. En Learning and Teaching Mathematics. An Internacional perspective, Psychology Press ltd, Publishers, United Kingdom, pp. 53-67.

Carriedo, N. & Rucian, M. (2009). Adaptación para niños de la prueba de amplitud lectora de Daneman & Carpenter (PALn). Infancia y Aprendizaje, 32 (3), 449-485.

Chaytor, N., Schmitter-Edgecombe, M., Burr, R. (2006). Improving the ecological validity of executive functioning assessment. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 21, 217-227.

Chuderski, A. (2014). Which Working Memory Components Predict Fluid Intelligence: The Roles of Attention Control and Active Buffer Capacity. Psychology, 5, 328-339. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/psych.2014.55043.

Chuderski, A., Taraday, M., Nęcka, E., & Smoleń, T. (2012). Storage Capacity Explains Fluid Intelligence while Executive Control Does Not. Intelligence, 40, 278-295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2012.02.010.

Conway, A. R. A., Jarrold, C., Kane, M. J., Miyake, A., & Towse, J. N. (Eds.) (2007). Variations in working memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Conway, A. R. A., Kane, M. J. & Engle, R.W. (2003). Working memory capacity and its relation to general intelligence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7 (12), 547-552.

Daneman, M. & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 19 (4), 450-466.

Davidson, D. J., Zacks, R. T. & Williams, C. C. (2003). Stroop Interference, practice and aging. Aging Neuropsychology and Cognition, 10, 85-98.

Elosúa, M. R., Gutiérrez-Martínez, F., García-Madruga, J. A., Luque, J. L. & Gárate, M. (1996). Adaptación española del Reading Span Test de Daneman y Carpenter. Psicothema, 8, 383-395.

Engle, R. W. (2002). Working memory capacity as executive attention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11 (1), 19- 23.

Egner, T. (2007). Congruency sequence effects and cognitive control. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 7 (4), 380-390.

Eriksen, B. A., Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon identification of a target letter in a non- search task. Perception and Psychophysics 16: 143–149. doi:10.3758/bf03203267

Eriksen, C.W. (1997). La tarea de los flancos y la competición de respuestas: Un instrumento útil para investigar una variedad de problemas cognitivos. Estudios de Psicología, 57, 93-108.

Flowers, J. H., Warner, J. & Polansky, M. (1979), Response and encoding factors in "ignoring" irrelevant information, Memory Cognition, 7, 86-94.

Fox, L A., Shor, R E. & Steinman, R L. (1971). Semantic gradients and interference in naming color, spatial direction, and numerosity. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 91, 59-65.

Friedman, N.P., Miyake, A., Corley, R.P., Young, S.E., DeFries, J.C., Hewitt, J.K., (2006). Not all executive functions are related to intelligence. Psychological Science, 17 (2), 172–179.

García-Molina, A., Tirapu-Ustárroz, J. & Roig-Rovira, T. (2007). Validez ecológica en la exploración de las funciones ejecutivas. Anales de psicología, 23-2, 289-299.

Gelman, R. & Gallistel, C. (1978). The child's understanding of number. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

Gelman, R. y Meck, E. (1983). Preschooler's counting: principles before skill, Cognition, 13, 343-360.

Gutiérrez-Martínez, F. y Ramos, M. (2014). La memoria operativa como capacidad predictora del rendimiento escolar. Estudio de adaptación de una medida de memoria operativa para niños y adolescentes. Psicología Educativa, 20 (1), 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pse.2014.05.001

Gutiérrez-Martínez, F., García-Madruga, J. A., Carriedo, N., Vila, J. O. & Luzón, J. M. (2005). Dos pruebas de amplitud de memoria operativa para el razonamiento. Cognitiva, 17 (2), 183-207.

Heine, A. , Tamm, S. , De Smedt, B., Schneider, M. , Thaler, V. , Torbeyns, J. , Stern, E., Verschaffel, L. & Jacobs, A. (2010). The Numerical Stroop Effect in Primary School Children: A Comparison of Low, Normal, and High Achievers, Child Neuropsychology, 16: 5, 461 - 477. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09297041003689780

Hommel, B. (2011). The Simon effect as tool and heuristic. Acta Psychologica 136 (2011) 189–202.

Houx, P. J., Jolles, J., & Vreeling, F.W. (1993). Stroop Interference: Aging effects associated with the Stroop Color-WordTest. Experimental Aging Research, 19, 209-224.

Imbrosciano, A., & Berlach, R. G. (2005). The stroop test and its relationship to academic performance and general behaviour of young students. Teacher Development, 9 (1), 131-144. http://doi.org/10.1080/13664530500200234.

Kane, M. J. & Engle, R. W. (2002). The role of prefrontal cortex in working-memory capacity, executive attention, and general fluid intelligence: an individual-differences perspective. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 637–671.

Kane, M. J., & Engle, R. W. (2003). Working-memory capacity and the control of attention: The contributions of goal neglect, response competition, and task set to Stroop interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 47–70. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.132.1.47.

Lezak, M. D., Howieson, D. B., & Loring, D. W. (2004). Neuropsychological assessment (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Long, D. L., & Prat, C. S. (2002). Working memory and Stroop interference: An individual differences investigation. Memory & Cognition, 30, 294–301. doi:10.3758/BF03195290

López-Villalobos, J. A., Serrano-Pintado, I., Andrés-De Llano, J. M., Delgado Sánchez-Mateos, J., Alberola-López, S. & Sánchez-Azón, M. I. (2010). Utilidad del test de Stroop en el trastorno por déficit de atención/hiperactividad. Revista Neurológica, 50 (6): 333-340.

Lu, C. H., & Proctor, R. W. (1995). The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 174–207. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03210959

MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 163-203.

MacLeod, C. M., & Dunbar, K. (1988). Training and Stroop-like interference: Evidence for a continuum of automaticity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 14, 126-135.

Meier, M. E. & Kane, M. J. (2013). Working Memory Capacity and Stroop Interference. Global vs. Local Indices of Executive Control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 3, 748–759.

Milham, M. P., Banich, M. T., & Barad, V. (2003). Competition for priority in processing increases prefrontal cortex’s involvement in top – down: an event – related fMRI study of the stroop task. Cognitive Brain Research, 17, 212–222. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0926-6410(03)00108-3.

Mueller, S. T. & Piper, B. J. (2014). The Psychology Experiment Building Language (PEBL) and PEBL Test Battery. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 30, 222: 250–259. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2013.10.024.

Posner, M. I., & Snyder, C. R. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Information processing and cognition: The Loyola Symposium (pp. 55-85). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Protopapas, A., Archonti, A., & Skaloumbakas, C. (2007). Reading ability is negatively related to Stroop interference. Cognitive Psychology, 54, 251–282. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.07.003

Raven, J. C., Court, J. H. & Raven J. (1996). Matrices progresivas. Publicaciones de psicología aplicada. Madrid: TEA.

Sedó, M. A. (2004).Test de las cinco cifras: una alternativa multilingüe y no lectora al test de Stroop. Revista de Neurología, 38 (9): 824-828.

Shor, R. E. (197 I). Symbol processing speed differences and symbol interference effects in a variety of concept domains. Journal of General Psychology, 85,187-205.

Simon, J. R. (1990). The effects of an irrelevant directional cue on human information processing. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.), Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 31-86). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 28, 643−662.

Tang, J., Critchley, H. D., Glaser, D. E. Dolan, R. J., & Butterworth, B. (2006). Imaging informational conflict: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study of numerical Stroop. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 2049–2062.

Uttl, B., & Graf, P. (1997). Color-Word Stroop test performance across the adult life span. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 19, 405-420.

Van der Elst, Van Boxtel, Van Breukelen, & Jolles, 2006. The Stroop Color-Word Test Influence of Age, Sex, and Education; and Normative Data for a Large Sample Across the Adult Age Range. Assessment 13 (1), 62-79. DOI: 10.1177/1073191105283427.

Windes, L. D. (1968). Reaction time for numerical coding and naming of numerals. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 78, 318-322.

Wolach, A. H., McHale, M. A. &Tarlea, A. (2004). Numerical stroop effect. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 98 (1): 67-77.

How to Cite
Gutiérrez-Martínez, F., Ramos-Ortega, M., & Vila-Chaves, J.- Óscar. (2017). Executive effectiveness on Stroop type interference tasks. A validation study of a numerical and manual version (CANUM). Anales De Psicología / Annals of Psychology, 34(1), 184-196. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.34.1.263431
Basic Psychology