Literature DB >> 28080086

Attentional capture by taboo words: A functional view of auditory distraction.

Jan P Röer1, Ulrike Körner1, Axel Buchner1, Raoul Bell1.   

Abstract

It is well established that task-irrelevant, to-be-ignored speech adversely affects serial short-term memory (STM) for visually presented items compared with a quiet control condition. However, there is an ongoing debate about whether the semantic content of the speech has the capacity to capture attention and to disrupt memory performance. In the present article, we tested whether taboo words are more difficult to ignore than neutral words. Taboo words or neutral words were presented as (a) steady state sequences in which the same distractor word was repeated, (b) changing state sequences in which different distractor words were presented, and (c) auditory deviant sequences in which a single distractor word deviated from a sequence of repeated words. Experiments 1 and 2 showed that taboo words disrupted performance more than neutral words. This taboo effect did not habituate and it did not differ between individuals with high and low working memory capacity. In Experiments 3 and 4, in which only a single deviant taboo word was presented, no taboo effect was obtained. These results do not support the idea that the processing of the auditory distractors' semantic content is the result of occasional attention switches to the auditory modality. Instead, the overall pattern of results is more in line with a functional view of auditory distraction, according to which the to-be-ignored modality is routinely monitored for potentially important stimuli (e.g., self-relevant or threatening information), the detection of which draws processing resources away from the primary task. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved).

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28080086     DOI: 10.1037/emo0000274

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Emotion        ISSN: 1528-3542


  11 in total

1.  The neurobiology of taboo language processing: fMRI evidence during spoken word production.

Authors:  Samuel J Hansen; Katie L McMahon; Greig I de Zubicaray
Journal:  Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci       Date:  2019-03-05       Impact factor: 3.436

2.  Auditory distraction does more than disrupt rehearsal processes in children's serial recall.

Authors:  Angela M AuBuchon; Corey I McGill; Emily M Elliott
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2019-05

3.  Paying attention to speech: The role of working memory capacity and professional experience.

Authors:  Bar Lambez; Galit Agmon; Paz Har-Shai Yahav; Yuri Rassovsky; Elana Zion Golumbic
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  Effects of Auditory Distraction on Face Memory.

Authors:  Raoul Bell; Laura Mieth; Jan Philipp Röer; Axel Buchner
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-07-15       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Positive and negative mood states do not influence cross-modal auditory distraction in the serial-recall paradigm.

Authors:  Saskia Kaiser; Axel Buchner; Raoul Bell
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-12-28       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  No sound is more distracting than the one you're trying not to hear: delayed costs of mental control of task-irrelevant neutral and emotional sounds.

Authors:  Örn Kolbeinsson; Erkin Asutay; Manja Enström; Jonas Sand; Hugo Hesser
Journal:  BMC Psychol       Date:  2022-02-21

7.  Task-specific auditory distraction in serial recall and mental arithmetic.

Authors:  Florian Kattner; Sarah Hanl; Linda Paul; Wolfgang Ellermeier
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2022-10-14

8.  The Dynamics of Attention Shifts Among Concurrent Speech in a Naturalistic Multi-speaker Virtual Environment.

Authors:  Keren Shavit-Cohen; Elana Zion Golumbic
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2019-11-08       Impact factor: 3.169

9.  Distraction by deviant sounds: disgusting and neutral words capture attention to the same extent.

Authors:  Fabrice B R Parmentier; Isabel Fraga; Alicia Leiva; Pilar Ferré
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2019-05-03

10.  Monetary incentives have only limited effects on auditory distraction: evidence for the automaticity of cross-modal attention capture.

Authors:  Raoul Bell; Laura Mieth; Axel Buchner; Jan Philipp Röer
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2020-12-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.