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
Boundaries of semantic distraction: dominance and lexicality act at retrieval
University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental psychology. School of Psychology, University of Central Lancashire, Darwin Building, Preston, Lancashire, United Kingdom.
Department of Applied Psychology, Cardiff Metropolitan University, Cardiff, United Kingdom .
University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental psychology. Linneaus Centre HEAD, Swedish Institute for Disability Research, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden . (Miljöpsykologi)ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7584-2275
School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom .
2014 (English)In: Memory & Cognition, ISSN 0090-502X, E-ISSN 1532-5946, Vol. 42, no 8, p. 1285-1301Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Three experiments investigated memory for semantic information with the goal of determining boundary conditions for the manifestation of semantic auditory distraction. Irrelevant speech disrupted the free recall of semantic category- exemplars to an equal degree regardless of whether the speech coincided with presentation or test phases of the task (Experiment 1), and this occurred regardless ofwhether it comprised random words or coherent sentences (Experiment 2). The effects of background speech were greater when the irrelevant speech was semantically related to the to-be-remembered material, but only when the irrelevant words were high in output dominance (Experiment 3). The implications of these findings in relation to the processing of task material and the processing ofbackground speech are discussed.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2014. Vol. 42, no 8, p. 1285-1301
Keywords [en]
Semantic auditory distraction; Selective attention; Interference-by-process; Semantic category clustering
National Category
Psychology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-16752DOI: 10.3758/s13421-014-0438-6ISI: 000344354500007PubMedID: 24993544Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84940268195OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hig-16752DiVA, id: diva2:722294
Available from: 2014-06-06 Created: 2014-06-06 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records BETA

Marsh, JohnSörqvist, Patrik

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Marsh, JohnSörqvist, Patrik
By organisation
Environmental psychology
In the same journal
Memory & Cognition
Psychology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 738 hits
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