Abstract
Direct eye gaze is a salient social stimulus that may hinder concurrent task performance, even when presented with another prominent distracter, such as the incongruent word in the Stroop paradigm. Previous studies (Chevallier et al., 2013; Conty et al., 2010) reported a stronger Stroop effect when direct gaze (vs. closed eyes)
was shown above the letter strings, though not all studies found this effect. We had two main goals. The first was to replicate the increased Stroop effect under direct eye gaze. The second was to test whether this effect is specific to another person's eyes (ostensive nature explanation) or also occurs for one's own eyes (salience explanation). In two experiments (one with a trial-based and one with a block-based manipulation), participants performed the Stroop task while presented with either their own or another person's direct gaze versus closed eyes. We found no increased Stroop effect under direct eye gaze compared to closed eyes, irrespective of whether one's own eyes or another person's eyes were presented. We conducted a third experiment to directly replicate the original findings by Conty et al. (2010) and Chevallier et al. (2013), including only another person's eyes. Again, no increase in the Stroop effect under direct eye gaze was found. A pooled analysis across the three experiments provided strong evidence for the null hypothesis. Taken together, we could not replicate previous findings of direct eye gaze increasing the Stroop effect. Our findings underline the central importance of replication studies and negative findings in experimental psychology
was shown above the letter strings, though not all studies found this effect. We had two main goals. The first was to replicate the increased Stroop effect under direct eye gaze. The second was to test whether this effect is specific to another person's eyes (ostensive nature explanation) or also occurs for one's own eyes (salience explanation). In two experiments (one with a trial-based and one with a block-based manipulation), participants performed the Stroop task while presented with either their own or another person's direct gaze versus closed eyes. We found no increased Stroop effect under direct eye gaze compared to closed eyes, irrespective of whether one's own eyes or another person's eyes were presented. We conducted a third experiment to directly replicate the original findings by Conty et al. (2010) and Chevallier et al. (2013), including only another person's eyes. Again, no increase in the Stroop effect under direct eye gaze was found. A pooled analysis across the three experiments provided strong evidence for the null hypothesis. Taken together, we could not replicate previous findings of direct eye gaze increasing the Stroop effect. Our findings underline the central importance of replication studies and negative findings in experimental psychology
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 106981 |
| Journal | Acta Psychologica |
| Volume | 267 |
| Number of pages | 10 |
| ISSN | 0001-6918 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 07.2026 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2026 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 10 Reduced Inequalities
Research areas and keywords
- Direct eye gaze
- Eye contact
- Social cognition
- Stroop interference
- Psychology
ASJC Scopus Subject Areas
- Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
- Developmental and Educational Psychology
- Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'The interference effect of direct eye gaze in the Stroop paradigm'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver