No significant group differences in Stroop color and word card times or in error rates on any Stroop card¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Groups did not differ significantly on Stroop color card time, word card time, or error counts on any card; no effect sizes were printed for these null results. → Medeiros W 2016

Evidence¶

Medeiros W 2016¶

Medeiros W, Torro-Alves N, Malloy-Diniz LF and Minervino CM (2016) Executive Functions in Children Who Experience Bullying Situations. Front. Psychol. 7:1197. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01197

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Kruskal–Wallis analyses of the Victoria Stroop test across the four groups found "no differences between groups with regard to Stroop word (time; χ2= 4.587, p= 0.205)" and no differences in color card time (p = 0.126) or any error measure; the article also notes victims presented longer execution time on the color card descriptively. Equivalence was not tested.

"We find no differences between groups with regard to Stroop word (time; χ2= 4.587, p= 0.205), Stroop color (errors; χ2= 3.795, p= 0.284), Stroop word (errors; χ2= 1.037, p= 0.792), and Stroop color-word (errors; χ2= 0.718, p= 0.869)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• No significant group differences on Iowa Gambling Task block trends, overall trend, or Decks B, C, and D choices
• Bully group children make more unfavorable Deck A choices on the Iowa Gambling Task than bully-victim children
• No significant group difference in working memory as measured by the Digit Span Backward subtest
• Victim group children take longer on Trail Making Test Part B than bullies, indicating lower cognitive flexibility in victims
• Bully group children complete the Stroop color-word card faster than victim and bully-victim children — related