Investigating the gaze-driven reversed congruency effect in the spatial Stroop task: A distributional approach
Metadatos
Mostrar el registro completo del ítemAutor
Ponce Guerrero, Renato; Lupiáñez Castillo, Juan; González García, Carlos; Casagrande, Maria; Marotta, AndreaEditorial
Wiley
Materia
Delta plots Distributional analysis Gaze and arrows
Fecha
2025-06-20Referencia bibliográfica
Ponce et al. Br J Psychol. 2025;00:1–21. [DOI: 10.1111/bjop.70004]
Patrocinador
María de Maeztu Unit of Excellence (CEX2023-001312- M), granted by MICIU/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and by UCE-PP2023- 11 from the University of Granada; Funding for open access charge: Universidad de Granada / CBUA; Grant PID2022-143054NB- I00 funded by MICIU/AEI /10.13039/501100011033 and by ERDF, EU; MICIU/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and FEDER, UE (research project PID2023-148421NB- I00); Predoctoral fellowship from the University of Rome, Sapienza (DR n. 1523/2022)Resumen
This study investigated how social (faces and eyes) and non-social
(arrows) stimuli modulate attentional orienting in a
spatial Stroop task, using a distributional approach. Data
from 11 studies (N = 705) were analysed through cumulative
distribution functions (CDF), delta functions, and polynomial
trend analyses. Three models were applied: (1) a reaction
time (RT) model comparing social (faces and eyes) vs.
non-social
stimuli under congruent and incongruent conditions,
(2) a delta model assessing conflict effects across
quantiles, and (3) a trend model identifying specific delta
function patterns. Non-social
targets produced a standard
congruency effect (SCE), with faster responses in congruent
trials but no consistent conflict reduction across the
distribution. In contrast, social stimuli exhibited a reversed
congruency effect (RCE), with faster responses in incongruent
trials, emerging from the second quantile onward and
minimal conflict among the fastest responses. Social targets
exhibited comparable reaction times in the RT model
and similar early delta plot patterns, suggesting shared initial
perceptual and attentional mechanisms between faces
and eyes. However, faces eventually induced a larger RCE,
possibly due to their more complex configuration. These
findings highlight distinctive patterns between social and
non-social
processing in the spatial Stroop task.





