hig.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Are individual differences in auditory processing related to auditory distraction by irrelevant sound?: A replication study
Department of Psychology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building Engineering, Energy Systems and Sustainability Science, Environmental Science. University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK.
Department of Psychology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
Department of Psychology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
2019 (English)In: Memory & Cognition, ISSN 0090-502X, E-ISSN 1532-5946Article in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
Abstract [en]

Irrelevant sounds can be very distracting, especially when trying to recall information according to its serial order. The irrelevant sound effect (ISE) has been studied in the literature for more than 40 years, yet many questions remain. One goal that has received little attention involves the discernment of a predictive factor, or individual difference characteristic, that would help to determine the size of the ISE. The current experiments were designed to replicate and extend prior work by Macken, Phelps, and Jones (Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 139-144, 2009), who demonstrated a significant predictive relationship between the size of the ISE and a type of auditory processing called global pattern matching. The authors also found a relationship between auditory processing involving deliberate recoding of sounds and serial order recall performance in silence. Across two experiments, this dissociation was not replicated. Additionally, the two types of auditory processing were not significantly correlated with each other. The lack of a clear pattern of findings replicating the Macken et al. (Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 139-144, 2009) study raises several questions regarding the need for future research on the characteristics of these auditory processing tasks, and the stability of the measurement of the ISE itself.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Psychonomic Society , 2019.
Keywords [en]
Auditory distraction, Individual differences, Replication, Serial recall
National Category
Applied Psychology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-30572DOI: 10.3758/s13421-019-00968-8PubMedID: 31363999OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hig-30572DiVA, id: diva2:1345327
Conference
United States
Available from: 2019-08-23 Created: 2019-08-23 Last updated: 2019-08-23Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Marsh, John E.

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Marsh, John E.
By organisation
Environmental Science
In the same journal
Memory & Cognition
Applied Psychology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf