Retraction Note: Losing control: Mostly incongruent lists postpone, but do not eliminate, the Stroop effect.

This article has been retracted at the request of all authors. In Experiments 3 and 4 an honest error in the experimental script pointed to the wrong stimulus file on 6.25% of trials, resulting in inaccurate output for each participant.

Losing control: Mostly incongruent lists postpone, but do not eliminate, the Stroop effect.

Identifying the color (e.g., red) of a color word that is incongruent (e.g., "BLUE") can be remarkably difficult. The Stroop effect is a measure of the interference between activity from word and color pathways. The efficacy of these pathways is thought to be highly contingent on the frequency of incongruent trials within a block. A block of trials with mostly incongruent (MI) trials typically results in a smaller Stroop effect than a block with mostly congruent (MC) trials. This reduction of the Stroop effect has been largely attributed to the strategic list-wide control of the word pathway. Here, the time course of the Stroop effect was explored using speed-accuracy tradeoff functions (SATfs) in tasks with 50 % congruent, MC, and MI trials. In the MC and 50 % congruent condition, color-word congruency affected the rate parameter of the SATf. In the MI condition, however, congruency affected the asymptote. This evidence is consistent with the idea that the strategic control of the word pathway is an effortful, temporary phenomenon, prone to buckle if responding is held in check.

Anchoring effects in the judgment of confidence: semantic or numeric priming?

Over the last decade, researchers have debated whether anchoring effects are the result of semantic or numeric priming. The present study tested both hypotheses. In four experiments involving a sensory detection task, participants first made a relative confidence judgment by deciding whether they were more or less confident than an anchor value in the correctness of their decision. Subsequently, they expressed an absolute level of confidence. In two of these experiments, the relative confidence anchor values represented the midpoints between the absolute confidence scale values, which were either explicitly numeric or semantic, nonnumeric representations of magnitude. In two other experiments, the anchor values were drawn from a scale modally different from that used to express the absolute confidence (i.e., nonnumeric and numeric, respectively, or vice versa). Regardless of the nature of the anchors, the mean confidence ratings revealed anchoring effects only when the relative and absolute confidence values were drawn from identical scales. Together, the results of these four experiments limit the conditions under which both numeric and semantic priming would be expected to lead to anchoring effects.