Respond to the center arrow only - press β Left or β Right. Ignore the arrows around it. 40 trials, measuring attention and reaction speed.
Created by Eriksen & Eriksen (1974), the Flanker task shows that humans are slower and less accurate when surrounding arrows point the opposite direction (incongruent trials) vs the same direction (congruent trials). The difference - the Flanker Effect - measures your attentional filtering ability. Attentional filtering speed is a key human benchmark in executive function research.
Pair with the Stroop Test and Go/No-Go for a complete executive function profile.
The Flanker task is a respected human benchmark in neuroscience β your interference score reveals how well your prefrontal cortex filters noise under pressure.
Developed by Barbara and Charles Eriksen in 1974, the Flanker paradigm has become one of cognitive psychology's most widely used tools. The core finding: responses to a target stimulus are slower and less accurate when surrounding "flanker" stimuli point in the opposite direction (incongruent) versus the same direction (congruent). This Flanker Effect - typically 40β80ms of RT cost and 5β10% accuracy loss - quantifies how effectively your attention system can select relevant information and suppress irrelevant competing input.
Unlike the Stroop effect (which involves semantic interference), the Flanker effect is spatial - the irrelevant information is literally adjacent to the target. This spatial competition between stimuli engages the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), a brain region central to conflict monitoring and top-down attentional control. Flanker performance is commonly used as an index of ACC efficiency.
The Flanker test is particularly relevant to driving safety - where ignoring peripheral distractions while maintaining lane attention is critical - and to academic performance in environments with visual distractions. Children with ADHD consistently show elevated Flanker effects compared to neurotypical controls, making it a useful screening instrument in developmental cognitive neuroscience.
Average RT across all trials is typically 380β450ms. The key metric is the congruency effect - the RT difference between incongruent and congruent trials. A small congruency effect (under 40ms) indicates efficient attentional filtering. A large effect (over 80ms) suggests difficulty suppressing spatial competitors - which may improve with attention training.
A congruency effect under 40ms indicates efficient attentional filtering. Average reaction time across all trials is typically 380-450ms, so consistently faster times with a small congruency gap represent strong performance.
The Stroop effect involves semantic interference from word meaning, while the Flanker effect is purely spatial - the irrelevant information is literally adjacent to the target rather than embedded in its meaning.
Children with ADHD consistently show elevated Flanker effects compared to neurotypical controls, making it a useful research instrument in developmental cognitive neuroscience, though it is not a standalone diagnostic tool.
The name refers to the flanking, or surrounding, arrows that create distracting visual noise around the central target arrow you need to respond to.
Yes, the Eriksen Flanker Task, developed in 1974, is one of the most widely used tools in cognitive psychology for studying selective attention and interference control.
With repeated practice, response times on both congruent and incongruent trials typically improve, though the relative interference effect often persists to some degree.
Some studies suggest regular mindfulness meditation practice is associated with improved attentional control, which could modestly benefit interference tasks like the Flanker test.
Difficulty varies by individual, but both tap into similar underlying selective attention and inhibitory control mechanisms, just using different types of conflicting visual information.
Yes, since the task already demands strong selective attention, any additional divided attention from multitasking typically increases errors and slows response times.
A congruency effect over 80ms suggests difficulty suppressing spatial competitors and weaker attentional filtering, though this ability may improve somewhat with targeted attention training.