Literature DB >> 14578083

Directly assessing the relationship between irrelevant speech and articulatory suppression.

Ian Neath1, Lisa A Farley, Aimée M Surprenant.   

Abstract

Larsen and Baddeley (2003) examine whether the disruption caused by articulatory suppression on immediate memory tasks is similar to or different from the disruption caused by irrelevant speech. Based on experiments in which they test whether the phonological similarity effect is present or absent, they conclude that articulatory suppression and irrelevant speech are different. We assessed whether articulatory suppression and irrelevant speech are similar or different by correlating the disruption each causes. A significant correlation obtained, indicating a relation between the two. These apparently different conclusions can be readily resolved by adopting the view that articulatory suppression, irrelevant speech, and many other factors vary in the degree to which they are likely to cause subjects to abandon reliance on phonological/acoustic cues in particular tasks.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14578083     DOI: 10.1080/02724980244000756

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol A        ISSN: 0272-4987


  10 in total

1.  Irrelevant speech, articulatory suppression, and phonological similarity: a test of the phonological loop model and the feature model.

Authors:  J Richard Hanley; Eirini Bakopoulou
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2003-06

2.  Backward recall and benchmark effects of working memory.

Authors:  Tamra J Bireta; Sheena E Fry; Annie Jalbert; Ian Neath; Aimée M Surprenant; Gerald Tehan; Georgina Anne Tolan
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2010-04

3.  High working memory capacity attenuates the deviation effect but not the changing-state effect: further support for the duplex-mechanism account of auditory distraction.

Authors:  Patrik Sörqvist
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2010-07

4.  Decomposing the role of rehearsal in auditory distraction during serial recall.

Authors:  Angela M AuBuchon; Corey I McGill; Emily M Elliott
Journal:  Audit Percept Cogn       Date:  2020-11-10

5.  Coherence of the irrelevant-sound effect: individual profiles of short-term memory and susceptibility to task-irrelevant materials.

Authors:  Emily M Elliott; Nelson Cowan
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2005-06

6.  Articulatory suppression and the irrelevant-speech effect in short-term memory: does the locus of suppression matter?

Authors:  Thomas C Toppino; Anthony Pisegna
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2005-04

7.  Irrelevant speech effects and sequence learning.

Authors:  Lisa A Farley; Ian Neath; David W Allbritton; Aimée M Surprenant
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2007-01

8.  Evaluating models of working memory through the effects of concurrent irrelevant information.

Authors:  Jason M Chein; Julie A Fiez
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2010-02

Review 9.  High working memory capacity does not always attenuate distraction: Bayesian evidence in support of the null hypothesis.

Authors:  Patrik Sörqvist; John E Marsh; Anatole Nöstl
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2013-10

10.  Functional Gait Can Be Affected by Noise: Effects of Age and Cognitive Function: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Margot Buyle; Viktoria Azoidou; Marousa Pavlou; Vincent Van Rompaey; Doris-Eva Bamiou
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2021-02-09       Impact factor: 4.003

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.