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
Distraction control processes in free recall: benefits and costs to performance
University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental psychology. University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom.
University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Environmental psychology. Linköping University. (Miljöpsykologi)ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7584-2275
École de psychologie, Université Laval, Canada; Cardiff Metropolitan University, UK.
University of Reading, UK.
Show others and affiliations
2015 (English)In: Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory and Cognition, ISSN 0278-7393, E-ISSN 1939-1285, Vol. 41, no 1, p. 118-133Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

How is semantic memory influenced by individual differences under conditions of distraction? This question was addressed by observing how participants recalled visual target words—drawn from a single category—while ignoring spoken distractor words that were members of either the same or a different (single) category. Working memory capacity (WMC) was related to disruption only with synchronous, not asynchronous, presentation, and distraction was greater when the words were presented synchronously. Subsequent experiments found greater negative priming of distractors among individuals with higher WMC, but this may be dependent on targets and distractors being comparable category exemplars. With less dominant category members as distractors, target recall was impaired—relative to control—only among individuals with low WMC. The results highlight the role of cognitive control resources in target–distractor selection and the individual-specific cost implications of such cognitive control.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2015. Vol. 41, no 1, p. 118-133
Keywords [en]
auditory distraction; working memory capacity; free recall; negative priming; inhibition
National Category
Psychology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-16857DOI: 10.1037/a0037779ISI: 000347707700007PubMedID: 25329080Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84925767968OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hig-16857DiVA, id: diva2:723973
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2010-2042Available from: 2014-06-11 Created: 2014-06-11 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
Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory and Cognition
Psychology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 717 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