Literature DB >> 22283509

Disruption of writing processes by the semanticity of background speech.

Patrik Sörqvist1, Anatole Nöstl, Niklas Halin.   

Abstract

Previous studies have noted that writing processes are impaired by task-irrelevant background sound. However, what makes sound distracting to writing processes has remained unaddressed. The experiment reported here investigated whether the semanticity of irrelevant speech contributes to disruption of writing processes beyond the acoustic properties of the sound. The participants wrote stories against a background of normal speech, spectrally-rotated speech (i.e., a meaningless sound with marked acoustic resemblance to speech) or silence. Normal speech impaired quantitative (e.g., number of characters produced) and qualitative/semantic (e.g., uncorrected typing errors, proposition generation) aspects of the written material, in comparison with the other two sound conditions, and it increased the duration of pauses between words. No difference was found between the silent and the rotated-speech condition. These results suggest that writing is susceptible to disruption from the semanticity of speech but not especially susceptible to disruption from the acoustic properties of speech.
© 2012 The Authors. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology © 2012 The Scandinavian Psychological Associations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22283509     DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2011.00936.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Scand J Psychol        ISSN: 0036-5564


  13 in total

1.  The Role of Visual Stimuli in Cross-Modal Stroop Interference.

Authors:  Danielle A Lutfi-Proctor; Emily M Elliott; Nelson Cowan
Journal:  Psych J       Date:  2014-03-01

2.  Boundaries of semantic distraction: dominance and lexicality act at retrieval.

Authors:  John E Marsh; Nick Perham; Patrik Sörqvist; Dylan M Jones
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2014-11

Review 3.  Does noise affect learning? A short review on noise effects on cognitive performance in children.

Authors:  Maria Klatte; Kirstin Bergström; Thomas Lachmann
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-08-30

4.  On interpretation and task selection in studies on the effects of noise on cognitive performance.

Authors:  Patrik Sörqvist
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-10-30

5.  Acoustic noise alters selective attention processes as indicated by direct current (DC) brain potential changes.

Authors:  Karin Trimmel; Julia Schätzer; Michael Trimmel
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2014-09-26       Impact factor: 3.390

6.  Individual differences in distractibility: An update and a model.

Authors:  Patrik Sörqvist; Jerker Rönnberg
Journal:  Psych J       Date:  2014-03-10

Review 7.  ICBEN review of research on the biological effects of noise 2011-2014.

Authors:  Mathias Basner; Mark Brink; Abigail Bristow; Yvonne de Kluizenaar; Lawrence Finegold; Jiyoung Hong; Sabine A Janssen; Ronny Klaeboe; Tony Leroux; Andreas Liebl; Toshihito Matsui; Dieter Schwela; Mariola Sliwinska-Kowalska; Patrik Sörqvist
Journal:  Noise Health       Date:  2015 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 0.867

8.  How Concentration Shields Against Distraction.

Authors:  Patrik Sörqvist; John E Marsh
Journal:  Curr Dir Psychol Sci       Date:  2015-08

9.  High second-language proficiency protects against the effects of reverberation on listening comprehension.

Authors:  Patrik Sörqvist; Anders Hurtig; Robert Ljung; Jerker Rönnberg
Journal:  Scand J Psychol       Date:  2014-04

10.  On interpretation and task selection: the sub-component hypothesis of cognitive noise effects.

Authors:  Patrik Sörqvist
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-01-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.