Literature DB >> 8177959

Disruption of memory for lip-read lists by irrelevant speech: further support for the changing state hypothesis.

D M Jones1.   

Abstract

Two experiments critically re-examine the finding of Campbell and Dodd (1984, Experiment 2), which suggests that irrelevant speech disrupts the encoding of visual material for serial recall. Support is sought for the competing view that the effect of irrelevant speech is on storage by comparing the effect of a range of acoustic conditions on memory for graphic and lip-read lists. Initially, serial short-term recall of visually presented lists was examined with irrelevant speech that was both asynchronous with the visually presented items and of varied speech content (Experiment 1a). In this experiment substantial impairments in recall of both graphic and lip-read lists were found. However, with unvarying asynchronous speech (Experiment 1b) the effect of speech was small and non-significant. Experiment 2 examined the effect of changing state and of synchrony of speech with lip movements. When conditions of synchronous and asynchronous unvarying speech were contrasted, no significant effect of synchrony or irrelevant speech was found (Experiment 2a and 2c). In contrast, when the speech was varying in content, a strong effect of irrelevant speech was found; moreover, the effect was roughly the same for synchronous and asynchronous materials (Experiment 2b). The contrast in outcome with varying and unvarying speech provides strong support for the "changing state" model of the irrelevant speech effect. Coupled with the absence of an effect of synchrony in Experiment 2, these experiments reinforce the view that disruption by irrelevant speech occurs in memory, not at encoding.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8177959     DOI: 10.1080/14640749408401147

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


  9 in total

Review 1.  Modeling the effects of irrelevant speech on memory.

Authors:  I Neath
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2000-09

2.  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

Review 3.  How the bimodal format of presentation affects working memory: an overview.

Authors:  Serena Mastroberardino; Valerio Santangelo; Fabiano Botta; Francesco S Marucci; Marta Olivetti Belardinelli
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2007-10-12

4.  An irrelevant speech effect with repeated and continuous background speech.

Authors:  D C Lecompte
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1995-09

5.  The phonological loop model of working memory: an ERP study of irrelevant speech and phonological similarity effects.

Authors:  M Martín-Loeches; S R Schweinberger; W Sommer
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1997-07

6.  Cross-modal Informational Masking of Lipreading by Babble.

Authors:  Joel Myerson; Brent Spehar; Nancy Tye-Murray; Kristin Van Engen; Sandra Hale; Mitchell S Sommers
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  Organizational factors in the effect of irrelevant speech: the role of spatial location and timing.

Authors:  D M Jones; W J Macken
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1995-03

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

9.  Doubts About the Role of Rehearsal in the Irrelevant Sound Effect.

Authors:  Jamielyn R Samper; Alexandra Morrison; Jason Chein
Journal:  Exp Psychol       Date:  2021-12-15
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.