Skills and Expertise Psy2002

Stroop task

classic example of a conflict task that reveals how automatic and controlled processes can interfere with each other.

Stroop Task Paradigm

Participants are asked to name the ink colour of a word, which may itself be the name of a different colour (e.g., the word "red" printed in blue ink).

Stroop Task Key finding

Naming the ink colour is slower and less accurate in incongruent conditions due to interference from the automatic process of word reading.

Stroop task Conclusion

Demonstrates a conflict between automatic word reading and controlled colour naming

Stroop task Reveals Multiple dimensions of automaticity

Stimulus-response compatibility

Attentional Focus

Speed of processing

Training and Experience

Stimulus-response compatibility

Response conflict arises when the stimulus format does not match the response format (e.g., saying a colour vs. pointing to it).

Durgin (2000): Found a "reverse Stroop effect" when participants pointed to colour patches, challenging the idea that word reading is always automatic.

Attentional Focus

Besner et al. (1997): When attention is directed to a single letter (e.g., by colouring one letter or using an arrow cue), the Stroop effect can be reduced or eliminated, suggesting that automaticity is not entirely autonomous.

Speed of Processing

Glaser & Glaser (1982): Manipulating stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) showed that word interference is not just due to speed, but also dependent on timing of processing stages.

Training and Experience

MacLeod & Dunbar (1988): With practice, novel associations can become automatic, indicating a continuum rather than an all-or-none model of automaticity.

Automatic and Controlled processes

Often interact hierarchically, especially in skilled performance

Hierarchical Control model (Logan & Crump, 2010)

Skilled behaviours (e.g., typing) involve multiple levels: high-level intentions guide low-level motor routines.

Participants may not be consciously aware of individual actions but can still correct errors, indicating interaction between conscious control and automatic execution.

Evidence: "Illusions of authorship" where feedback manipulated awareness of errors.

Skills vs Habits

Habits are stereotyped, automatic, and inflexible.

Skills involve both automaticity and goal-directed flexibility.

Definition of skill - Pacherie & Mylopoulos

Skilled action is marked by a dynamic interplay between automatic routines and cognitive control, enabling adaptability under varying conditions

Yerkes-Dodson Law

Optimal performance occurs at moderate levels of arousal; too much or too little impairs performance.

Choking Under Pressure (Beilock et al.)

Experts may underperform when overly focused on step-by-step control of well-learned motor tasks (e.g., dribbling with the dominant foot).

Ironic Processing (Wegner 1994)

The harder you try not to do something (e.g., avoid errors), the more likely it is to occur under stress or cognitive load.

Attentional Disruptions (Logan & Crump)

Focusing on automatic components (e.g., individual fingers in typing) can disrupt fluid skilled action.

Deliberate Practice - Ericsson et al. (1993)

Proposed that deliberate practice—effortful, structured, and feedback-driven—is the primary factor in expert performance.

Ericsson - key limitations

Other factors matter

Not all practice is equally effective

Empirical challenges

Other factors matter

Innate ability, environmental opportunities, and motivation also play crucial roles.

Not everyone has equal access to training or coaching (e.g., support, time, resources).

Not all practice equally effective

Some evidence (e.g., Macnamara & Maitra, 2019) suggests that deliberate practice explains only part of the variance in expertise.

Ericsson empircal challenges

Some replications found weaker correlations between practice hours and performance than originally reported.

Elite performers sometimes engage in less practice than predicted but still outperform others, suggesting other influences.