F AA-AM-72-14 

THE COLOR-WORD INTERFERENCE TEST AND ITS 

RELATION TO PERFORMANCE IMPAIRMENT UNDER 

AUDITORY DISTRACTION 

Richard I. Thackray, Ph.D. 

Karen N. Jones, B.S. 

Robert M. Touchstone, M.S. 

FAA Civil Aeromedical Institute 

P.O. Box 25082 

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73125 

March 1972 

Availability is unlimited. Document may be released 

to the National Technical Information Service, 

Springfield, Virginia 22151, for sale to the public. 

Prepared for 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

Office of Aviation Medicine 

Washington, D.C. 20591 
:------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- ------------------------------------------------------------

Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Aviation 

Medicine, Civil Aeromedical Institute, Oklahoma City, 

Oklahoma. THE COLOR-WORD INTERFERENCE 

TEST AND ITS RELATION TO PERFORMANCE 

IMPAIRMENT UNDER AUDITORY DISTRACTION 

by Richard I. Thackray, Karen N. Jones, and Robert 

l\'I. Touchstone, March 1972, 5 pp. Report No. FAAAM-72-14. 

The ability to resist distraction is an important requirement 

for air traffic controllers. The present study examined the 

relationship between performance on the Stroop color-word 

interference test (a suggested measure of distraction susceptiblliity) and impairment under auditory distraction on a task 

requiring the subject to generate random sequences of letters. 

Fifty male college students served as Ss. Although there was 

a significant decrease in "randomness" as a result of auditory 

distraction, the correlation between change in randomness and amount of color-word interference was nonsignificant. 

These findings, along with those of several other studies, 

suggest that the Stroop test may measure a rather restricted 

type of perceptual interference essentially unrelated to a possibly more general ability to maintain concentration in 

the presence of competing (distracting) stimuli. 

I. Thackray, 

R.I. 

II. Jones, K. N. 

III. Touchstone, 

R. M. 

Descriptors 

Attention 

Distraction 

Stress Stroop test 

Federal Aviation Administ

Medicine, Civil Aeromedical 

Oklahoma. THE COLOR-W

TEST AND ITS RELATIO

IMPAIRMENT UNDER AU

by Richard I. Thackray, Ka

llf. Touchstone, March 1972

AM-72-14. 

The ability to resist distra

for air traffic controllers. 

relationship between perfo

interference test (a suggest

ibiliity) and impairment un

requiring the subject to gen

Fifty male college students 

a significant decrease in "ra

distraction, the correlation 

and amount of color-word 

These findings, along with 

suggest that the Stroop tes

type of perceptual interfe

possibly more general abil

the presence of competing 

------------------------------

..._ _________ 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------

Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Aviation 

Medicine, Civil Aeromedical Institute, Oklahoma City, 

Oklahoma. THE COLOR-WORD INTERFERENCE 

TEST AND ITS RELATION TO PERFORMANCE 

IMPAIRMENT UNDER AUDITORY DISTRACTION 

by Richard I. '.rhackray, Karen N. Jones, and Robert 

l\'I. Touchstone, March 1972, 5 pp. Report No. FAAAM-72-14. 

The ability to resist distraction is an important requirement 

for air traffic controllers. The present study examined the 

relationship between performance on the Stroop color-word 

interference test (a suggested measure of distraction susceptibiliity) and impairment under auditory distraction on a task 

requiring the subject to generate random sequences of letters. 

Fifty male college students served as Although there was 

a significant decrease in "randomness" as a result of auditory 

distraction, the correlation between change in randomness 

and amount of color-word interference was nonsignificant. 

These findings, along with those of several other studies, 

suggest that the Stroop test may measure a rather restricted 

type of perceptual interference essentially unrelated to a 

possibly more general ability to maintain concentration in 

the presence of competing (distracting) stimuli. 

I. Thackray, 

R.I. 

II. Jones, K. N. 

III. Touchstone, 

R. M. 

Descriptors 

Attention 

Distraction 

Stress Stroop test 

Federal Aviation Administr

Medicine, Civil Aeromedical 

Oklahoma. THE COLOR-W

TEST AND ITS RELATIO

IMPAIRMENT UNDER AU

by Richard I. '.rhackray, Ka

M. Touchstone, 1972, 

AM-72-14. 

The ability to resist distrac

for air traffic controllers. 

relationship between perfor

interference test (a suggest

ibiliity) and impairment un

requiring the subject to gen

Fifty male college students 

a significant decrease in "ra

distraction, the correlation 

and amount of color-word 

These findings, along with 

suggest that the Stroop tes

type of perceptual interfe

possibly more general abil

the presence of competing 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No . 

FAA-AM-72- 14 4. Title and Subtitle 

THE COLOR-WORD INTERFERENCE TEST AND ITS RELATION 

TO PERFORMANCE IMPAIRMENT UNDER AUDITORY DISTRACTION. 7. Authorl s) 

Richard I. Thackray, Ph.D., Karen N. Jo~es, B.S., 

and Robert M. Touchstone, M.S. 

3. R eci pient 's Catalog No. 

5 . Repo rt Date 

March 1972 

6. P erform ing Organ i zation Code 

8 . Perform ing Org oni zotion Report No . 

9 . Performing Organization Nome ond_Addre ss 10 . Work Unit No. 

FAA Civil Aeromedical Institute 

P. 0. Box 25082 11 . Co ntra ct or Grant No . 

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73125 

13. Type of Report and Period Covered 

~--------------------~----------------------------~ 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 

Office of Aviation Medicine 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S. W. 

Washington, D. C.. 20591 

15. Supp I ementory Notes 

OAM Report 

14 . Sponsoring Agency Code 

This research was conducted under Tasks No. AM-A-71-PSY-22 and AM-A-72-PSY-22. 

16 . Abstract 

The ability to resist distraction is an important requirement for air traffic 

controllers. The present study examined the relationship between performance 

on the Stroop color-word interference test (a suggested measure of distraction 

susceptibility) and impairment under auditory distraction on a task requiring 

the subject to generate random sequences of letters. Fifty male college 

students served as ~s. Although there was a significant decrease in "randomness" 

as a result of auditory distraction, the correlation between change in randomness and amount of color-word interference was nonsignificant. These findings, 

along with those of several other studies, suggest that the Stroop test may 

measure a rather restricted type of perceptual interference essentially 

unrelated to a possibly more general ability to maintain concentration in the 

presence of competing (distracting) stimuli. 

17 . Key Words 

Attention 

Distraction 

Stress 

Stroop test 

19. Security Classif. (of this report) 

Unclassified 

Form DOT F 1700.7 !B-691 

18. Distribution Statement 

Availability is unlimited. Document may 

be released to the National Technical 

Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 

22151, for sale to the public. 

20. Security C/assif. (of this page) 21· No. of Pages 22. Price 

Unclassified 5 $3.00 
THE COLOR-WORD INTERFERENCE TEST AND ITS RELATION TO 

PERFORMANCE IMPAIRMENT UNDER AUDITORY DISTRACTION 

I. Introduction. 

The Stroop color-word interference test 11 has 

been suggested as a possible measure of the ability 

to attend selectiYely to certain stimuli in the 

presence of irreleYant and competing stimuli.5 8 

This ability is of obvions importance in certain 

a Yiation occupations (e.g., air traffic control) 

where sustained attention in the presence of 

auditory or visual distraction is often required. 

In Yiew of the relatiYe lack of tests to measure 

"distractibility," 8 research to eYaluate the usefnlness of this particular test as a possible predictor of performance impairment under distraction 

would seem indicated. 

A previous study by Thackray and Jones 1 2 

described the deYelopment of a laboratory version 

of the Stroop test for use in distraction research 

and examined the influence of simultaneously 

presented relevant (conflicting color names) and 

irrelevant (random numbers) auditory distraction on the color-word interference effect. 

Although several other studies had employed 

conflicting auditory stimuli in conjunction '~ith 

the visually-presented color-word stimuli 3 9 these ' studies were primarily concerned with the use of 

the Stroop test as a stressor and neither actually 

examined the extent of additional interference 

which they assumed would result from the 

auditory stimuli. Consequently, it seemed 

desirable, for purposes of test development, to 

determine the magnitude of the increase in interference which might result from the addition of 

conflicting auditory stimuli. 

The method developed by Thackray and 

.Tones 12 for presenting the visual color-word 

stimuli was successful in eliciting the characteristic Stroop effect.* However, there were no 

*Increase in reaction time from Part II (naming colors 

of colored rectangles) to Part III (naming colors of ink 

in which incongruent color-names are printed). 

1 

significant performance or physiological differences between the group which received the 

tan~ard Stroop conditions and the groups which 

received the standard Stroop conditions plus 

relemnt or irreleYant auditory distraction. This 

indicated that the addition of auditory "distrac-

~ion" did not augment or modify the basic effect 

m any way. 

I£ the color-word interference test measures a 

form of general ability to sustain attention in the 

presence of interfering stimuli, one might have 

expected the addition of the competing auditory 

stimuli to haYe resulted in at least some increase 

in response times to the visual stimuli. The lack 

of effect of the auditory stimuli suggests that the 

Stroop test may reflect susceptibility to a rather 

specific kind of perceptual interference. I£ this 

is the case, the test may possibly have limited usefnlness as a measure of general distractibility. 

The present study was conducted to evaluate 

this possibility. Susceptibility to interference, 

as measured by the Stroop test, was compared 

with extent of performance impairment on a task 

known to be adversely affected by distraction. 

The task chosen was random generation of letters 

of the alphabet. This task has been used in 

seYeral recent studies concerned with deploymen~ _of attention and has been shown to be quite 

se~s1t1~·e to the effects of distracting auditory 

stlmuli. 10 14 The usual procedure consists of instructing subjects (Ss) to try to generate letters 

of the alphabet (or numbers) in "random" order 

at some experimenter-determined rate. Amount 

of change in randomness under auditory distraction reflects the degree of success with which Ss 

are able to sustain attention to the primary task 

and exclude or ignore the irrele,·ant auditory 

stimuli. 

II. Method. 

A. Subjects. Fifty paid male university 

students between the ages of 18 and 25 were 
no reported color-Yision or hearing deficiencies. 

B. Appamtus. The S's console containing all 

of the equipment necessary for him to perform 

the task was located in one room with the programming and recording equipment located in an 

adjoining room. 

The basic apparatus for the Random Generation (RG) task consisted of a pair of Koss 

Pro/ 4-AA headphones for presenting the task 

instructions and the distraction stimuli, a Sony 

F -25 microphone, and a pair of small "stimulus" 

lights for pacing the S's responses. The lights 

were located directly in front of the Sand flashed 

momentarily e\·ery two seconds. They were 

actuated automatically by a set of Hunter timers. 

Leads from the microphone were connected to an 

amplifier and a second set of headphones to enable monitoring and recording of the S's Yerbal 

responses. 

For the Stroop test, slides were projected onto 

a rear projection screen by means of a Lafayette 

l\1odel KT -800 Automatic Projection Tachistoscope. The stimuli were 35 mm slides of words 

or colored rectangles and 'vere 27mm high and 

68mm wide when projected on the screen. A 

small white cross in the middle of the screen 

sen·ed as a fixation point. Response buttons with 

the stimulus words printed abm·e them were' located to the S's right approximately three inches 

abm·e the shelf on \vhich the 8 rested his hand 

between responses. A series of DaYis Scientific 

Instrument timers was used to advance the slides 

and actuate the shutter. Inter-stimulus intervals 

were three seconds with exposure durations of 0.5 

seconds. The S's response and reaction time (in 

msec.) to each slide was recorded on paper tape 

by means of a Welford Mark V SETAR (Welford Bioelectronics Enterprises). 

C. Procechtre. TTpon arrival, the S was taken 

to the experimental room and the experimenter 

(E) played a tape recording of the initial 

orientation instructions and the instructions for 

the first task (RG task).* In the instructions 

for the RG task the S was told that his task 

'vould be to generate a series of random letters 

*All Ss received the RG task prior to being administered the Stroop test. This was felt desirable in 

order to eliminate the possible influence of the particular 

quasi-random order employed with the Stroop stimuli on 

the S's conception of randomness. 

2 

gi ,·en Baddeley's standard instructions 2 in which 

he was asked to imagine that on each trial he 

was drawing a letter from a hat, saying the 

letter out loud, and returning the letter to the 

hat so that on each trial every letter would be 

present and haYe an equal chance of being chosen. 

He was also asked to keep in mind that such a 

series of letters wonld be completely random 

and wonld not be likely to consist of words, 

alphabetic sequences, etc. 

The 8 was told that each flashing of the lights 

\vas designated as a trial and was given a practice 

series of 20 trials. He was informed that the 

whole task \vould take about 25 minutes and 

would be divided into three parts with a short 

rest period behveen parts. (Each part contained 

150 trials and lasted approximately five minutes 

with 2-min. rest periods between parts.) Dnring 

the first part, the S worked in silence. At the 

beginning of the second part, he was informed 

that he wonld hear random letters through his 

headphones, but that he was to try to ignore 

them. A continnons 5-min. tape recording consisting of the letters B, D, F, G, I, K, M:, N, Q, 

R, T, V, and Y arranged in a random order was 

presented to the 8 dnring this part. Intervals 

between letters varied randomly from approximately 0.5 sec. to 1.0 sec. The third part was 

identical to the first. At the end of the RG task, 

the E went into the 8's room, removed the headphones, microphone, and stimulus lights and set 

up the equipment for the Stroop test. 

The S was told that this next task would have 

three parts, each of which would be explained 

separately, and that there would be brief rest 

periods between parts. The 8 was instructed to 

press the response button corresponding to the 

stimulus presented on the screen. He was asked 

to press the buttons as rapidly as possible and 

then look back at the fixation spot. For each 

part, there were 4 practice- and 72 test-stimulus 

slides. There were 2-min. rest periods between 

parts which allowed time for the E to change the 

slides. Stimuli in each part \Yere arranged in a 

quasi-random order, with the restrictions that 

each stimulus appear an equal number of times 

and that no hYo adjacent stimuli be the same. 

The stimuli for Part I were the words 

BROWN, GREEN, ORANGE, and PURPLE 

printed in black. 
corresponding to the 

ords presented in Part I . 

The stimuli for Part III consisted of the conrentional Stroop color-word stimuli, i.e., color 

names used in Part I printed in incongruent 

colored ink. The 8 was instructed to ignore the 

word itself and respond only to the color of the 

ink. 

Duration of the Stroop test ''"as approximately 

30 minutes. 

D. M ea8urement and Sc01·ing of Data. For 

the Stroop test, response times to the 72 stimuli 

of each part were obtained for each S and 

means were computed . Randomness orer the 

150 trials in each of the three parts of the 

RG task was measured by the entropy formula 

H=log2N- (1/N)Lnilog2n; where N is the number of trials and 11 i is the frequency of usage of 

each letter of the alphabet. The higher the value 

of H, the more random the series.

1 

III. Results. 

1\fean H-ralues for the three parts of the RG 

task are shown in Table 1. As expected the effect 

of the auditory distraction was to reduce randomness. 

TAnu: 1. Mean H-value~ for the pre-distraction, distraction, and post-distraction parts. 

Part H -values 

Pre-distraction ------------------------------- 4.4052 

Distraction ---------------------------------- 4.3558 

Post-distraction ------------------------------ 4.4034 

A repeated measures analysis of rariance re-

,-ealed this reduction to be significant (F=5.12; 

df=2,98; p<.01). Although the magnitude of 

the effect appears small, the H-ralues obtained 

for the nondistraction and distraction parts are 

virtually identical to those obtained by Schimek 

and \Vachtel 10 under comparable conditions. 

In order to obtain a baseline measure of 

randomness, H-ralues for the pre- and postdistraction parts \Yere first tested for statistical 

equiralence using Tukey's HSD test. 7 The test 

rerealed that the difference between these two 

parts was nonsignificant (p>.05). Consequently, 

the H-ralues for these two parts were combined 

and change in randomness was determined by 

subtracting each S's H-value for the second part 

from his mean value for the pre- and postdistraction parts. 

For the color-word interference test, mean 

response times were 851 and 1015 msecs. for Parts 

3 

approximate those obtained for the comparable 

stimulus conditions in the previous study by 

Thackray and J onesY 

Although a rariety of scores hare been suggested as measures of the color-word interference 

effect, a factor analysis of these measures by 

.Jensen • has demonstrated a simple difference 

score behYeen the color-word part (Part III) 

and the color part (Part II) to be the most effecti ,-e measure of the interference effect. Consequently, the product-moment correlation between this measure of color-word interference 

and the difference scores on the RG task was 

computed. Although the correlation was positive, 

it was quite low and nonsignificant (1·=.12; 

p > .05). No imJ)rovement was obtained when 

the same scores for both tests were expressed m 

terms of percent change. 

IV. Discussion. 

The results of the present study confirm earlier 

findings 10 14 that the ability to generate random 

letters or digits is significantly impaired \Yhen Ss 

are reqnired to perform this task in the presence 

of auditory distraction. Indi,·idual differences 

in the extent of this impairment, howerer, were 

fonnd to be completely unrelated to differences 

in the magnitude of color-word interference on 

the Stroop test. This lack of relationship supports the implications of the resnlts obtained in 

the 11re,·ious study by Thackray and ,Jones 12 that 

the Stroop test reflects snsceptibility to a limited 

kind of perceptual interference which may be 

essentially unrelated to what Is commonly 

thought of as distractibility. 

In a factor analytic study designed to investigate possible correlates of field dependenceindependence, Karp 6 identified two clusters of 

factors which \Yere associated with two rather 

different types of risual distraction situations. 

One cluster of factors ''"as represented in general 

by tests in \Yhich the critical stimulus is presented 

in the presence of irrelerant stimuli which compete with, but do not distort or modify, the basic 

properties of the central stimulus. An example 

of such tests \Yonld be the digit symbol subtest of 

the \Vechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. Presumably tests loading on this cluster reflect an 

ability typically implied by the common conception of concentration, i.e., the ability to sustain 

attention in the presence of potentially interfering ("distracting") stimuli. 
y gpp

central stimulus are actually changed by the irrelevant stimuli and new, competing gestalts are 

formed. An example \vould be the embeddedfigure test. Although some degree of correlation 

exists between these two clusters of factors, Karp 

apparently feels that the ability to oYercome the 

effects of embedding contexts represents a factorily different ability than the ability to sustain 

concentration in the presence of "distracting" 

stimuli. 

While Karp did not employ the Stroop test in 

his factor analysis, other im·estigators ha,-e examined the relationship between this test and 

the embedded figures test. 5 Moderate correlations 

ranging from 0.36 to 0.54 ha ,.e generally been 

reported. This would suggest that the Stroop 

test might well ha,-e loaded on the same factors 

as the embedded figures test had it been included 

in Karp's study. It might also suggest that had 

the embedded figures test been employed in the 

present study it would haYe been unrelated to 

performance change on the random generation 

task under auditory distraction. This in fact 

was one of the findings of the Schimek and 

' Vachtel 1 0 study. Their results failed to support 

the hypothesis that field dependent Ss (as determined by scores on the embedded figures test) 

would show greater impairment on the random 

generation task than field independent Ss. No 

relationship whatsoe,·er was found between any 

of the measures of field dependence and either 

4 

'V achtel 13 has noted that a controversy exist

as to whether such tests as the Stroop test an

the embedded figures test primarily reflect th

ability to extract items from embedding context

or \Yhether they represent a more general capacit

to selectiYely direct attention to relevant rathe

than competing irrelevant stimuli. The finding

of the studies reYiewed here taken together wit

those of the present im·estigation strongly sug

gest that "distractibility" as measured by th

color-word interference test may be more closel

related to the rather restricted ability to over

come the effects of embedding contexts than t

the more general capacity to attend to a task i

the presence of competing irrelevant stimuli

Additional support for this is provided b

l\[andell 8 who found that performance of chil

dren on the Stroop test was unrelated to teache

ratings of distractibility. 

l\[ore promising, perhaps, as a measure of dis

tractibility is the task used in the present stud

as the "criterion" measure. The ability to gen

erate random letters or digits has been clearl

shown to be impaired in the presence of auditory 

distraction. As Schimek and 'V achtel' 0 suggest

the measure of randomness appears to be 

promising one for the study of individual differ

ences in attention deployment. Further research 

using change in randomness under distraction a

a predictor variable would seem indicated. 
REFERENCES 

1. Attneave, F.: Application of Information Theory to 

Psychology, :'\e\\' York: Holt, Hinehart and Winston, 

1959, 120 p. 

2. Baddeley, A. D. : The Capacity for Generating Information by Randomization, QUARTERLY JOURNAL 

OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 18:119- 129, 

1966. 

3. Frankenhaeuser, l\1., .T. Froberg, R. Hagdahl, A. 

Rissler, C. Bjorkvall, and B. Wolff: Physiological, 

Behavioral, and Subjective Indices of Habituation 

to Psychologieal Stress, PHYSIOLOGY AND BEHAVIOR, 2 :229-237, 1967. 

4. Jensen, A. R.: Scoring the Stroop Test, ACTA 

PSYCHOLOGICA, 24 :398-408, 1965. 

5. Jensen, A. R., and W. D. Rohwer: The Stroop ColorWord Test: A Review, ACTA PSYCHOLOGICA, 

25 :36-93, 1966. 

6. Karp, S. A.: Field Dependence and Overcoming 

Ernbeddedness, JOURNAL OF CONSULTING PSYCHOLOGY, 27:294-302, 1963. 

7. Kirk, R. E.: Ea:per·irnental D esign: Procedures for 

the Behavioral Sciences, Belmont, California: 

Brooks/Cole, 1968, 577 p. 

8. l\landell, S. J . : Child1·en's Resistance to Compet·ing 

and Distracting St·imuli in the Classroom, Doctoral 

5 

dissertation, University of Southern California, Los 

Angeles, (University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, 

Michigan, No. 66-11, 578), 1966. 

9. Rissler, A.: Performance in a Task Involving 

Perceptual Conflict. In Levi, L. (Ed.), Emotional 

Stress, New York: American Elsevier Publishing Co., 

Inc., 1965, 280 p. 

10. Schimek, J. G., and P. L. Wachtel: Exploration of 

Effects of Distraction, Competing Tasks and Cognitive St)·le on Attention Deployment, PERCEPTUAL 

AND MOTOR SKILLS, 28 :567-574, 1969. 

11. Stroop, J. R. : Studies of Interference in Serial 

Verbal Reactions, JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL 

PSYCHOLOGY, 18:643-662, 1935. 

12. Thackray, R. 1., and K. N. Jones: Level of Arousal 

During Stroop Performance: Effects of Speed Stress 

and "Distraction", PSYCHONOMIC SCIENCE, 

23 :133-135, 1971. 

13. Wachtel, P. L.: Conceptions of Broad and Narrow 

Attention, PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 68:417-

429, 1967. 

14. Wolitzky, D. L., and D. P. Spence: Individual Consistencies in the Random Generation of Choices, 

PERCEPTUAL AXD MOTOR SKILLS, 26 :1211-

1214, 1968. 
,-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Aviation 

Medicine, Civil Aeromedical Institute, Oklahoma City, 

Oklahoma. THE COLOR-WORD INTERFERENCE 

TEST AND ITS RELATION TO PERFORMANCE 

IMPAIRMENT UNDER AUDITORY DISTRACTION 

by Richard I. Thackray, Karen N. Jones, and Robert 

M. Touchstone, Mar(;h 1972, 5 pp. Report No. FAAAM-72-14. 

The ability to resist distraction is an important requirement 

for air traffic controllers. The present study examined the 

relationship between performance on the Stroop color-word 

interference test (a suggested measure of distraction susceptibiliity) and impairment under auditory distraction on a task 

requiring the subject to generate random sequences of letters. 

Fifty male college students served as Ss. Although there was 

a significant decrease in "randomness" as a result of auditory 

distraction, the correlation between change in randomness 

and amount of color-word interference was nonsignificant. 

These findings, along with those of several other studies, 

suggest that the Stroop test may measure a rather restricted 

type of perceptual interference essentially unrelated to a 

possibly more general ability to maintain concentration in 

the presence of competing (distracting) stimuli. 

I. Thackray, 

R.I. 

II. Jones, K. N. 

III. Touchstone, 

R. M. 

Descriptors 

Attention 

Distraction 

Stress Stroop test 

Federal Aviation Admin

Medicine, Civil Aeromedi

Oklahoma. THE COLO

TEST AND ITS RELA

IMPAIRMENT UNDER 

by Richard I. 'rhackray, 

M. Touchstone, Mar(;h 19

AM-72-14. 

The ability to resist dis

for air traffic controller

relationship between pe

interference test (a sugg

ibiliity) and impairment 

requiring the subject to 

Fifty male college studen

a significant decrease in 

distraction, the correlat

and amount of color-w

These findings, along w

suggest that the Stroop 

type of perceptual inte

possibly more general a

the presence of competi

------------------------------ """'------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

... 

----

Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Aviation 

Medicine, Civil Aeromedical Institute, Oklahoma City, 

Oklahoma. THE COLOR-WORD INTERFERENCE 

TEST AND ITS RELATION TO PERFORMANCE 

IMPAIRMENT UNDER AUDITORY DISTRACTION 

by Richard I. Thackray, Karen N. Jones, and Robert 

M:. 'l'ouchstone, lllarch 1972, 5 pp. Report No. FAAAM-72-14. 

The ability to resist distraction is an important requirement 

for air traffic controllers. The present study examined the 

relationship between performance on the Stroop color-word 

interference test (a suggested measure of distraction susceptibiliity) and impairment under auditory distraction on a task 

requiring the subject to generate random sequences of letters. 

Fifty male college students ser ved as S>'i. Although there was 

a significant decrease in "randomness" as a result of auditory 

distraction, the correlation between change in randomness 

and amount of color-word interference was nonsignificant. 

These findings, along with those of several other studies, 

suggest that the Stroop test may measure a rather restricted 

type of perceptual interference essentially unrelated to a 

possibly more general ability to maintain concentration in 

the presence of competing (distracting) stimuli. 

I. Thackray, 

R.I. 

II. Jones, K. N. 

III. Touchstone, 

R. M. 

Descriptors 

Attention 

Distraction 

Stress Stroop test 

Federal Aviation Admin

Medicine, Civil Aeromedic

Oklahoma. THE COLO

TEST AND ITS RELA

IMPAIRMENT UNDER 

by Richard I. Thackray, 

i\f. Touchstone, lllarch 19

AM-72-14. 

The ability to resist dis

for air traffic controller

relationship between per

interfeTence test (a sugg

ibiliity) and impairment 

requiring the subject to 

Fifty male college studen

a significant decrease in 

distraction, the correlat

and amount of color-w

These findings, along w

suggest that the Stroop 

type of perceptual inte

possibly more general a

the presence of competin

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------