Literature DB >> 29389192

Postcategorical auditory distraction in short-term memory: Insights from increased task load and task type.

John E Marsh1, Jingqi Yang2, Pamela Qualter2, Cassandra Richardson2, Nick Perham3, François Vachon4, Robert W Hughes5.   

Abstract

Task-irrelevant speech impairs short-term serial recall appreciably. On the interference-by-process account, the processing of physical (i.e., precategorical) changes in speech yields order cues that conflict with the serial-ordering process deployed to perform the serial recall task. In this view, the postcategorical properties (e.g., phonology, meaning) of speech play no role. The present study reassessed the implications of recent demonstrations of auditory postcategorical distraction in serial recall that have been taken as support for an alternative, attentional-diversion, account of the irrelevant speech effect. Focusing on the disruptive effect of emotionally valent compared with neutral words on serial recall, we show that the distracter-valence effect is eliminated under conditions-high task-encoding load-thought to shield against attentional diversion whereas the general effect of speech (neutral words compared with quiet) remains unaffected (Experiment 1). Furthermore, the distracter-valence effect generalizes to a task that does not require the processing of serial order-the missing-item task-whereas the effect of speech per se is attenuated in this task (Experiment 2). We conclude that postcategorical auditory distraction phenomena in serial short-term memory (STM) are incidental: they are observable in such a setting but, unlike the acoustically driven irrelevant speech effect, are not integral to it. As such, the findings support a duplex-mechanism account over a unitary view of auditory distraction. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29389192     DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000492

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn        ISSN: 0278-7393            Impact factor:   3.051


  6 in total

1.  How the deployment of visual attention modulates auditory distraction.

Authors:  John E Marsh; Tom A Campbell; François Vachon; Paul J Taylor; Robert W Hughes
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 2.199

2.  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

3.  Prior information can alter how sounds are perceived and emotionally regulated.

Authors:  Örn Kolbeinsson; Erkin Asutay; Johan Wallqvist; Hugo Hesser
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2022-06-24

4.  Negative target stimuli do not influence cross-modal auditory distraction.

Authors:  Saskia Kaiser; Axel Buchner; Laura Mieth; Raoul Bell
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-10-07       Impact factor: 3.752

5.  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

6.  The metacognition of auditory distraction: Judgments about the effects of deviating and changing auditory distractors on cognitive performance.

Authors:  Raoul Bell; Laura Mieth; Jan Philipp Röer; Axel Buchner
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2021-07-13
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.