The Effect of Cognitive Control on Different Types of Auditory Distraction
A Preregistered Study
Abstract
Abstract. Deviant as well as changing auditory distractors interfere with short-term memory. According to the duplex model of auditory distraction, the deviation effect is caused by a shift of attention while the changing-state effect is due to obligatory order processing. This theory predicts that foreknowledge should reduce the deviation effect, but should have no effect on the changing-state effect. We compared the effect of foreknowledge on the two phenomena directly within the same experiment. In a pilot study, specific foreknowledge was impotent in reducing either the changing-state effect or the deviation effect, but it reduced disruption by sentential speech, suggesting that the effects of foreknowledge on auditory distraction may increase with the complexity of the stimulus material. Given the unexpected nature of this finding, we tested whether the same finding would be obtained in (a) a direct preregistered replication in Germany and (b) an additional replication with translated stimulus materials in Sweden.
References
2010). ERP correlates of the irrelevant sound effect. Psychophysiology, 47, 1182–1191. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.01029.x
(2012). Habituation of the irrelevant sound effect: Evidence for an attentional theory of short-term memory disruption. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 1542–1557. doi: 10.1037/a0028459
(2002). Auditory memory and the irrelevant sound effect: Further evidence for changing-state disruption. Memory, 10, 199–214. doi: 10.1080/09658210143000335
(1976). Acoustic masking in primary memory. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 15, 17–31. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371%2876%2990003-7
(1995). Attention and memory: An integrated framework. London, UK: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195119107.001.0001
(1998). Is level irrelevant in “irrelevant speech?” Effects of loudness, signal-to-noise ratio, and binaural unmasking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1406–1414. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.24.5.1406
(1997). Individual differences in susceptibility to the “irrelevant speech effect”. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 102, 2191–2199. doi: 10.1121/1.419596
(2014). The psychoacoustics of the irrelevant sound effect. Acoustical Science and Technology, 35, 10–16. doi: 10.1250/ast.35.10
(2016). Distraction in verbal short-term memory: Insights from developmental differences. Journal of Memory and Language, 88, 39–50. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2015.12.008
(2007). G*power3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. doi: 10.3758/BF03193146
(2006). The difference between “significant” and “not significant” is not itself statistically significant. The American Statistician, 60, 328–331. doi: 10.1198/000313006X152649
(2013). Result-blind peer reviews and editorial decisions: A missing pillar of scientific culture. European Psychologist, 18, 286–294. doi: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000144
(2012). Preventing distraction by probabilistic cueing. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 83, 342–347. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2011.11.019
(2014). Auditory distraction: A duplex-mechanism account. PsyCH Journal, 3, 30–41. doi: 10.1002/pchj.44
(2013). Cognitive control of auditory distraction: Impact of task difficulty, foreknowledge, and working memory capacity supports duplex-mechanism account. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 539–553. doi: 10.1037/a0029064
(2005). Auditory attentional capture during serial recall: Violations at encoding of an algorithm-based neural model? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 736–749. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.31.4.736
(2007). Disruption of short-term memory by changing and deviant sounds: Support for a duplex-mechanism account of auditory distraction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 1050–1061. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.33.6.1050
(1995). Phonological similarity in the irrelevant speech effect: Within- or between-stream similarity? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 103–133. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.21.1.103
(1997). The role of habituation in the disruption of recall performance by irrelevant sound. British Journal of Psychology, 88, 549–564. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1997.tb02657.x
(1990). Disruption of proofreading by irrelevant speech: Effects of attention, arousal or memory? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 4, 89–108.
(1984). Procedures of mind. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 23, 425–449. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371%2884%2990282-2
(2005). Disruption of attention by irrelevant stimuli in serial recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 53, 513–531. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2005.07.002
(1995). An irrelevant speech effect with repeated and continuous background speech. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 391–397. doi: 10.3758/BF03210978
(2010). Cross-modal distraction by background speech: What role for meaning? Noise & Health, 12, 210–216. doi: 10.4103/1463-1741.70499
(2014). Predictability and distraction: Does the neural model represent post-categorical features? PsyCH Journal, 3, 58–71. doi: 10.1002/pchj.50
(1990). Habituation to irrelevant speech: Effects on a visual short-term memory task. Perception & Psychophysics, 47, 291–297. doi: 10.3758/BF03205003
(2007).
(Roddy Roediger’s memory . In J. S. NairneEd., The foundations of remembering: Essays in honor of Henry L. Roediger, III (pp. 1–18). New York, NY: Psychology Press.2012). Expectations modulate the magnitude of attentional capture by auditory events. PLoS One, 7, e48569. doi: 0.1371/journal.pone.0048569
(2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349, aac4716. doi: 10.1126/science.aac4716
. (2016). Vulnerability to the irrelevant sound effect in adult ADHD. Journal of Attention Disorders, 20, 306–316. doi: 10.1177/1087054713492563
(2014a). Evidence for habituation of the irrelevant sound effect on serial recall. Memory & Cognition, 42, 609–621. doi: 10.3758/s13421-013-0381-y
(2014b). What determines auditory distraction? On the roles of local auditory changes and expectation violations. PLoS One, 9, e84166. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0084166
(2015). Specific foreknowledge reduces auditory distraction by irrelevant speech. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41, 692–702. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000028
(2011). The role of habituation and attentional orienting in the disruption of short-term memory performance. Memory & Cognition, 39, 839–850. doi: 10.3758/s13421-010-0070-z
(2015). Age equivalence in auditory distraction by changing and deviant speech sounds. Psychology and Aging, 30, 849–855. doi: 10.1037/pag0000055
(Semantic priming by irrelevant speech. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. doi: 10.3758/s13423-016-1186-3
(in press).2012). Algorithmic modeling of the irrelevant sound effect (ISE) by the hearing sensation fluctuation strength. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 74, 194–203. doi: 10.3758/s13414-011-0230-7
(2009). The distracting effects of a ringing cell phone: An investigation of the laboratory and the classroom setting. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 513–521. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.03.001
(2014). The value of direct replication. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9, 76–80. doi: 10.1177/1745691613514755
(2010). High working memory capacity attenuates the deviation effect but not the changing-state effect: Further support for the duplex-mechanism account of auditory distraction. Memory & Cognition, 38, 651–658. doi: 10.3758/MC.38.5.651
(2003). Top-down control over involuntary attention switching in the auditory modality. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 630–637. doi: 10.3758/BF03196525
(2012). Broken expectations: Violation of expectancies, not novelty, captures auditory attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 164–177. doi: 10.1037/a0025054
(