hig.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Keus van de Poll, Marijke, DoktorandORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0001-8311-2478
Alternative names
Publications (10 of 21) Show all publications
Braat-Eggen, E., Keus van de Poll, M., Hornikx, M. & Kohlrausch, A. (2019). Auditory distraction in open-plan study environments: Effects of background speech and reverberation time on a collaboration task. Applied Acoustics, 154, 148-160
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Auditory distraction in open-plan study environments: Effects of background speech and reverberation time on a collaboration task
2019 (English)In: Applied Acoustics, ISSN 0003-682X, E-ISSN 1872-910X, Vol. 154, p. 148-160Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Previous research has shown that semantic-based tasks are negatively influenced by semantic aspects in background speech. Collaboration is an important task in open-plan study environments and is a semantic task which might be disrupted by background speech. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyze the influence of irrelevant background speech on student-collaboration. Participants worked in pairs to solve spot-the-difference puzzles, by using the 'DiapixUK' collaboration task, while they were exposed to different background sound scenarios. The composed sound scenarios varied in semantic content (mother tongue and foreign language background speech)and reverberation time (short vs long), the latter affecting speech intelligibility. Although a longer reverberation time decreases the intelligibility of background speech and a foreign language decreases meaningfulness of speech, no significant changes in performance were found. On the other hand, the data show an increased perceived disturbance for a longer reverberation time, which we interpret as an increased difficulty of interpersonal communication in the collaboration task due to the increased level of the background speech. The quiet reference condition was the most preferred sound condition which is in line with both the effect of a low background sound level and the absence of semantic interference. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2019
Keywords
Background speech, Collaboration task, Language, Noise disturbance, Open-plan study environments, Reverberation time, Task performance, Architectural acoustics, Reverberation, Semantics, Speech communication, Speech intelligibility
National Category
Psychology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-29909 (URN)10.1016/j.apacoust.2019.04.038 (DOI)2-s2.0-85065132668 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2019-06-14 Created: 2019-06-14 Last updated: 2019-06-14Bibliographically approved
Keus van de Poll, M. (2018). Disruption of writing by background speech. In: Lindberg, Per (Ed.), FALF KONFERENS 2018 Arbetet – problem eller potential för en hållbar livsmiljö?   10-12 juni 2018 Gävle: Program och abstracts. Paper presented at FALF 2018 konferens 'Arbetet - problem eller potential för en hållbar livsmiljö?', 10-12 juni 2018, Gävle (pp. 49). Gävle: Gävle University Press
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Disruption of writing by background speech
2018 (English)In: FALF KONFERENS 2018 Arbetet – problem eller potential för en hållbar livsmiljö?   10-12 juni 2018 Gävle: Program och abstracts / [ed] Lindberg, Per, Gävle: Gävle University Press , 2018, p. 49-Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Aim

The aim of this contribution is to review parts of the knowledge gathered so far about the effects of background speech on writing performance and to discuss the implications for open-plan offices.

Background

Irrelevant background speech is amongst the most often mentioned sources of annoyance at work and it can impair writing performance. Thus, performance and health are challenged when working in open-plan offices wherein background sound is commonplace. To investigate the effects of irrelevant background speech on writing in a more detailed way, five studies were done. Study one investigated whether the semantic properties of the irrelevant background speech contribute to disruption of writing processes. A follow-up study investigated the relationship between Speech Transmission Index and writing fluency. In study three, Experiment 1 explored the appreciation and effectiveness of several ways of masking background speech. Experiment 2 studied whether background speech from simultaneous talkers (i.e. 3, 5 and 7 talkers compared to 1 single talker) lead to distraction. Study four investigated the combined effects of task interruptions caused by task shifting and task interruptions caused by background speech. The fifth study investigated whether sound source location and inattention could modulate the relation between background speech and writing fluency.

Methods

All studies had experimental within-subject designs. Participants wrote stories while they were exposed to different sound conditions.

Results

Study one revealed that meaningful speech disrupted writing performance compared to meaningless rotated speech and quiet. Study two showed that disruption kicks in with relatively low speech intelligibility. In Experiment 1 in study three, the most effective and appreciated way of masking background speech was with multiple voices and Experiment 2 revealed that performance was worst with 1 background voice and best with 7 voices. Study four showed that it took 10-15 seconds to reach the same writing speed after an interruption as before. In study five, results showed that high inattentive individuals might profit from low intelligible background speech located behind them. Self-reports revealed that speech coming from the front was perceived as more distracting compared to speech coming from behind.

Conclusions

The most important result is that writing fluency is highly sensitive to the intelligibility of background speech. This suggests that the designs of noisy work environments should be adjusted for the tasks that have to be executed. Writing should be done in a quiet environment with minimal risks for task interruptions.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Gävle: Gävle University Press, 2018
National Category
Occupational Health and Environmental Health
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-28851 (URN)978-91-88145-28-4 (ISBN)
Conference
FALF 2018 konferens 'Arbetet - problem eller potential för en hållbar livsmiljö?', 10-12 juni 2018, Gävle
Available from: 2018-12-17 Created: 2018-12-17 Last updated: 2018-12-17Bibliographically approved
Keus van de Poll, M., Sjödin, L. & Nilsson, M. (2018). Disruption of writing by background speech: Does sound source location and number of voices matter?. Applied Cognitive Psychology
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Disruption of writing by background speech: Does sound source location and number of voices matter?
2018 (English)In: Applied Cognitive Psychology, ISSN 0888-4080, E-ISSN 1099-0720Article in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
Abstract [en]

It is not unusual that people have to write in an environment where background speech is present. Background speech can vary in both speech intelligibility and location of the sound source. Earlier research has shown disruptive effects of background speech on writing performance. To expand and reinforce this knowledge, the present study investigated the role of number of voices and sound source location in the relation between background speech and writing performance. Participants wrote texts in quiet or in background speech existing of one or seven voices talking simultaneously, located in front of or behind them. Overall, one voice was more disruptive than seven voices talking simultaneously. Self-reports showed that sound from the front was more disruptive compared to sound from behind. Results are in line with theory of interference-by-process, attentional capture and the cross-modal theory of attention. The relevance of the results for open-office environments is discussed.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Wiley & Sons, 2018
Keywords
distraction, sound source location, speech intelligibility, writing
National Category
Applied Psychology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-26064 (URN)10.1002/acp.3490 (DOI)2-s2.0-85058137981 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2018-01-26 Created: 2018-01-26 Last updated: 2019-06-26Bibliographically approved
Keus van de Poll, M. (2018). Disruption of writing in noisy office environments. (Doctoral dissertation). Gävle: Gävle University Press
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Disruption of writing in noisy office environments
2018 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

The overall aim of the four experimental studies included in this dissertation was to investigate the influence of background speech on writing performance. In Paper I, a manipulation of speech intelligibility of background speech, by using the Speech Transmission Index (STI), revealed disruptive effects at lower STI values (i.e. with relative low speech intelligibility) than expected, based on an earlier developed model. This showed that writing is more sensitive to disruption from background speech than previously thought.

Experiment 1 in Paper II addressed the question whether the sound of babble, sound of water waves, or pink noise is the most effective and appreciated way of masking background speech to reduce its intelligibility and thereby its disruptiveness. Masking with babble was best. Experiment 2 in Paper II followed this finding up by showing that the disruption of writing by background speech is a function of the number of voices talking in the background—less voices, more disruption.

Paper III investigated the combined impact of background speech and task interruptions on writing performance. Background speech (which was played during the whole condition) after an interruption was expected to prolong the time it took to resume the same writing speed as before the interruption. This hypothesis was not confirmed, but participants’ self-reports showed that the combination of task interruptions and background speech convey a particularly high workload.

Paper IV explored what role sound source location and individual differences (inattention, noise sensitivity and working memory capacity) play in the disruption of writing by background speech. Self-reports showed that speech in front of the individual was perceived as more distracting compared to speech from behind. Other results in the same study showed that high inattentive individuals profit more from less intelligible speech located behind them than attentive individuals and high noise-sensitive individuals were more distracted by highly intelligible background speech than by less intelligible background speech.

The most important and replicable finding in this dissertation is that writing fluency is very sensitive to disruption from background speech; a finding relevant for the design of open work environments. In work areas where writing is a common task, the aim should be to create quiet work areas.

Abstract [sv]

Huvudsyftet med de fyra experimentella studierna som den här avhandlingen omfattar var att studera hur bakgrundsprat påverkar skrivandet av en text. I Artikel I manipulerades taluppfattbarheten (Speech Transmission Index; STI) i bakgrundspratet genom att till olika grad maskera talljudet med ett brusljud. Ljudet spelades sedan upp medan deltagarna arbetade. Resultaten visade att störningarna i skrivprocessen uppträder redan för lägre STI värden (d.v.s. redan vid låg taluppfattbarhet) än vad som förväntades baserad på en tidigare utvecklad modell.

Experiment 1 i Artikel II studerade vilket ljud (babbel, vågor eller brus) som är det mest effektiva och uppskattade för att maskera bakgrundsprat och reducera taluppfattbarhet i bakgrundsprat. Resultaten visade att babbel var bäst. Experiment 2 i Artikel II följde upp det här resultatet genom att visa att störningen från bakgrundsprat vid skrivande beror på antalet personer som pratar samtidigt i bakgrunden - färre röster, mer störning.

Artikel III fokuserade på hur skrivandet påverkas av att det, utöver bakgrundsprat, även finns andra avbrott i skrivuppgiften. Hypotesen var att bakgrundsprat (som spelades upp under hela betingelsen) direkt efter avbrottet skulle öka tiden det tar att nå samma skrivhastighet som före avbrottet. Den här hypotesen bekräftades inte, men deltagarnas självskattningar visade att kombinationen av avbrott och bakgrundsprat leder till en upplevelse av ökad arbetsbelastning.

Artikel IV undersökte huruvida ljudkällans position i rummet, samt individuella skillnader (uppmärksamhet, arbetsminneskapacitet och ljudsensitivitet) modererar hur bakgrundsprat påverkar skrivandet. Självskattningar visade att bakgrundsprat som kommer framifrån upplevs som mer störande än bakgrundsprat som kommer bakifrån. Resultaten visade även att personer som har en låg förmåga att bibehålla uppmärksamheten gynnades mer av bakgrundsprat med låg taluppfattbarhet som kom bakifrån än personer som har hög förmåga att bibehålla uppmärksamheten. Vidare var ljudkänsliga individer mer distraherade av bakgrundsprat med högre taluppfattbarhet, jämfört med lägre taluppfattbarhet.

Det viktigaste resultatet, som även replikerades mellan de olika studierna i den här avhandlingen, är att skrivprocessen är mycket känslig för bakgrundsprat; ett resultat som är relevant vid design av t.ex. öppna kontorslandskap. I arbetsomgivningar där skrivuppgifter är vanligt förekommande, bör tysta utrymmen skapas.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Gävle: Gävle University Press, 2018. p. 52
Series
Studies in the Research Profile Built Environment. Doctoral thesis ; 6
Keywords
background speech, writing, speech intelligibility, Speech Transmission Index, masking, sound source location, working memory capacity, inattention, noise sensitivity, task interruptions, bakgrundsprat, skriva, taluppfattbarhet, Speech Transmission Index, maskering, ljudposition, arbetsminneskapacitet, uppmärksamhet, ljudkänslighet, uppgiftsavbrott
National Category
Applied Psychology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-26066 (URN)978-91-88145-21-5 (ISBN)978-91-88145-22-2 (ISBN)
Public defence
2018-03-28, Lilla Jadwigasalen (12:108), Kungsbäcksvägen 47, Gävle, 13:00 (Swedish)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2018-03-06 Created: 2018-01-29 Last updated: 2018-03-22
Keus van de Poll, M. & Braat-Eggen, E. (2017). Effects of background speech on cooperation. In: : . Paper presented at Third International Conference on Cognitive Hearing Science for Communication, CHSCOM 2017,14-17 June, Linköping, Sweden.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Effects of background speech on cooperation
2017 (English)Conference paper, Poster (with or without abstract) (Refereed)
National Category
Applied Psychology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-24508 (URN)
Conference
Third International Conference on Cognitive Hearing Science for Communication, CHSCOM 2017,14-17 June, Linköping, Sweden
Available from: 2017-06-22 Created: 2017-06-22 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Keus van de Poll, M., Marsh, J. E. & Sörqvist, P. (2017). Kan arbetsminne förklara varför människor med schizotypy har uppmärksamhetsproblem?. Best Practice (April)
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Kan arbetsminne förklara varför människor med schizotypy har uppmärksamhetsproblem?
2017 (Swedish)In: Best Practice, ISSN 1329-1874, no AprilArticle in journal (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.)) Published
Abstract [sv]

Det är lätt att undvika att distraheras av det vi ser. Det räcker med att blunda. När det gäller ljud kan vi å andra sidan inte bara stänga av öronen för att slippa höra det. När vi sitter och jobbar, och inte vill höra ljud som finns i bakgrunden, registrerar hjärnan ljudet automatiskt.

Bakgrundsljud, som kan komma från folk som pratar, telefoner som ringer och så vidare, fångar vår uppmärksamhet och gör att vi tappar fokus på den uppgift vi har framför oss. Detta kan i förlängningen leda till irritation och till försämrad prestation och hälsa.

Att vara lättdistraherad har konsekvenser både för ens sociala beteende och för hur man fungerar på en arbetsplats eller skola. En lättdistraherad person som har sin arbetsplats i ett öppet kontorslandskap till exempel, där bakgrundsljud är mycket vanligt, presterar sämre än hen skulle göra på ett privat kontor där man generellt sett blir mindre störd. Vissa störs emellertid mer än andra. Varför är det så? En del av svaret på frågan är att människor varierar i något som kallas arbetsminneskapacitet. Arbetsminne är en minnesfunktion som används för att tillfälligt lagra och bearbeta information som vi har i medvetandet. Storleken på arbetsminnet (arbetsminneskapaciteten) kan variera mellan människor, och prestationen på många uppgifter, till exempel att läsa och skriva, beror på arbetsminneskapaciteten. Forskning har också visat att individer med låg arbetsminneskapacitet är mer lättdistraherade jämfört med individer med hög arbetsminneskapacitet.

Distraktion, schizotypy och arbetsminne Att vara mer lättdistraherad än andra är något som människor med hög grad av schizotypy känner igen sig i. Detta gäller både för dem som har diagnosen schizofreni och för dem som inte har diagnosen men som ändå har symtomen. Människor med hög grad av schizotypy har svårare än andra att hålla kvar uppmärksamheten och förbli fokuserade på en uppgift i en bullrig miljö. Ofta har de även sämre arbetsminne än andra, vilket innebär prestationsförluster i många situationer. En hypotes har därför varit att sambandet mellan schizotypy och distraktion beror på det sämre arbetsminnet.

I en nyligen publicerad studie1 testades denna hypotes, men det visade sig att variationer i arbetsminne inte kan förklara sambandet mellan schizotypy och distraktion. Individer som klassificerades ha ”hög grad av schizotypy” var mer distraherade av oväntade ljud under såväl en visuospatial som en verbal uppgift, jämfört med dem som klassificerades ha ”låg grad av schizotypy”. Samma mönster hittades för dem som klassificerades ha låg kontra hög arbetsminneskapacitet.

Det intressantaste resultatet från studien var emellertid att schizotypy och arbetsminneskapacitet bidrog på olika sätt till hur lätt individerna distraherades av det överraskande ljudet. Detta innebär att olika mekanismer ligger bakom den uppmärksamhetsproblematik som är kopplad till schizotypy jämfört med den problematik som är kopplad till sämre arbetsminneskapacitet. Med andra ord verkar det som om variationer i arbetsminne inte kan förklara varför individer med hög schizotypy har uppmärksamhetsproblem.

Exakt hur arbetsminneskapacitet och schizotypy skiljer sig åt är något som författarna till studien endast kunde spekulera om. En hypotes som är välgrundad i litteraturen är emellertid att variationer i arbetsminneskapacitet bidrar till distraherbarhet genom att påverka hur väl människor lyckas avgränsa uppmärksamhetens omfång till den uppgift de håller på med. Hög schizotypy bidrar å andra sidan genom att göra det svårare att ignorera saker i omgivningen, vilket skulle kunna bero på brister i habituering. Det innebär i det här fallet att hög schizotypy leder till svårigheter att vänja sig vid störningsfaktorn över tid, i takt med att man får allt mer erfarenhet av bakgrundsljudet.

Slutsats

Vi drar slutsatsen att arbetsminne och schizotypy tenderar att samvariera på ett sådant sätt att människor med hög grad av schizotypy också tenderar att ha låg arbetsminneskapacitet. Men det är inte den låga arbetsminneskapaciteten i sig som skapar uppmärksamhetsproblemen hos dessa individer. En viktig implikation av denna slutsats är att ”arbetsminnesträning” (det vill säga interventioner i form av träningsprogram som syftar till att öka arbetsminneskapaciteten) inte bör bidra till att minska uppmärksamhetsproblematiken för människor med hög grad av schizotypy.

National Category
Applied Psychology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-23999 (URN)
Available from: 2017-05-10 Created: 2017-05-10 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Keus van de Poll, M. (2017). The effects of background speech on word processed writing. In: : . Paper presented at ICEP2017, International Conference on Environmental Psychology: “Theories of change and social innovation in transitions towards sustainability”, 30-31 September 2017, La Coruna, Spain.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The effects of background speech on word processed writing
2017 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Refereed)
National Category
Applied Psychology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-25171 (URN)
Conference
ICEP2017, International Conference on Environmental Psychology: “Theories of change and social innovation in transitions towards sustainability”, 30-31 September 2017, La Coruna, Spain
Available from: 2017-09-07 Created: 2017-09-07 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Hurtig, A., Keus van de Poll, M., Pekkola, E., Hygge, S., Ljung, R. & Sörqvist, P. (2016). Children’s recall of words spoken in their first and second language: Effects of signal-to-noise ratio and reverberation time. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article ID 2029.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Children’s recall of words spoken in their first and second language: Effects of signal-to-noise ratio and reverberation time
Show others...
2016 (English)In: Frontiers in Psychology, ISSN 1664-1078, E-ISSN 1664-1078, Vol. 6, article id 2029Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Speech perception runs smoothly and automatically when there is silence in the background, but when the speech signal is degraded by background noise or by reverberation, effortful cognitive processing is needed to compensate for the signal distortion. Previous research has typically investigated the effects of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and reverberation time in isolation, whilst few have looked at their interaction. In this study, we probed how reverberation time and SNR influence recall of words presented in participants’ first- (L1) and second-language (L2). A total of 72 children (10 years old) participated in this study. The to-be-recalled wordlists were played back with two different reverberation times (0.3 and 1.2 sec) crossed with two different SNRs (+3 dBA and +12 dBA). Children recalled fewer words when the spoken words were presented in L2 in comparison with recall of spoken words presented in L1. Words that were presented with a high SNR (+12 dBA) improved recall compared to a low SNR (+3 dBA). Reverberation time interacted with SNR to the effect that at +12 dB the shorter reverberation time improved recall, but at +3 dB it impaired recall. The effects of the physical sound variables (SNR and reverberation time) did not interact with language.

Keywords
Children, Speech Perception, reverberation time, signal-to-noise ratio, Second-language, classroom acoustics
National Category
Psychology (excluding Applied Psychology)
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-20903 (URN)10.3389/fpsyg.2015.02029 (DOI)000368055900001 ()26834665 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-84959420428 (Scopus ID)
Funder
Swedish Research Council Formas, 242-2010-1006
Available from: 2015-12-19 Created: 2015-12-19 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Keus van de Poll, M. (2016). Effects of different types of masking on performance and the potential of multiple-voice masking. In: : . Paper presented at IAPS24, Lund, 27 June-1 July 2016.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Effects of different types of masking on performance and the potential of multiple-voice masking
2016 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Refereed)
National Category
Applied Psychology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-22286 (URN)
External cooperation:
Conference
IAPS24, Lund, 27 June-1 July 2016
Available from: 2016-08-23 Created: 2016-08-23 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Keus van de Poll, M. & Sörqvist, P. (2016). Effects of task interruption and background speech on word processed writing. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30(3), 430-439
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Effects of task interruption and background speech on word processed writing
2016 (English)In: Applied Cognitive Psychology, ISSN 0888-4080, E-ISSN 1099-0720, Vol. 30, no 3, p. 430-439Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Task interruptions and background speech, both part of the everyday situation in office environments, impair cognitive performance. The current experiments explored the combined effects of background speech and task interruptions on word processed writing-arguably, a task representative of office work. Participants wrote stories, in silence or in the presence of background speech (monologues, halfalogues and dialogues), and were occasionally interrupted by a secondary task. Writing speed was comparably low during the immediate period after the interruption (Experiments 1 and 2); it took 10-15s to regain full writing speed. Background speech had only a small effect on performance (Experiment 1), but a dialogue was more disruptive than a halfalogue (Experiment 2). Background speech did not add to the cost caused by task interruptions. However, subjective measures suggested that speech, just as interruptions, contributed to perceived workload. The findings are discussed in view of attentional capture and interference-by-process mechanisms.

Keywords
background speech, office environments, cognitive performance, task interruption
National Category
Applied Psychology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-21211 (URN)10.1002/acp.3221 (DOI)000380275500013 ()27818574 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-84963877488 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2016-02-09 Created: 2016-02-09 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0001-8311-2478

Search in DiVA

Show all publications