hig.sePublications
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 3 of 3
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent 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
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Elliott, Emily M.
    et al.
    Department of Psychology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
    Marsh, John E.
    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.
    Zeringue, Jenna
    Department of Psychology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
    McGill, Corey I.
    Department of Psychology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
    Are individual differences in auditory processing related to auditory distraction by irrelevant sound?: A replication study2019In: Memory & Cognition, ISSN 0090-502X, E-ISSN 1532-5946Article in journal (Refereed)
    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.

  • 2.
    Marsh, John
    et al.
    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.
    Perham, Nick
    Department of Applied Psychology, Cardiff Metropolitan University, Cardiff, United Kingdom .
    Sörqvist, Patrik
    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 .
    Jones, Dylan
    School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom .
    Boundaries of semantic distraction: dominance and lexicality act at retrieval2014In: Memory & Cognition, ISSN 0090-502X, E-ISSN 1532-5946, Vol. 42, no 8, p. 1285-1301Article in journal (Refereed)
    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.

  • 3.
    Sörqvist, Patrik
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Buildning science - applied psychology.
    High working memory capacity attenuates the deviation effect but not the changing-state effect: Further support for the duplex-mechanism account of auditory distraction2010In: Memory & Cognition, ISSN 0090-502X, E-ISSN 1532-5946, Vol. 38, no 5, p. 651-658Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Serial short-term memory is impaired by background sound, at least when a sound element suddenly deviates from an otherwise repetitive sequence (the deviation effect) and when each sound element in the sequence differs from the preceding one (the changing-state effect). Two competing theories have been proposed to explain these effects: One suggests that both effects are caused by the same mechanism (i.e., attentional resources being depleted by the sound), and the other suggests that the deviation effect is caused by attentional capture and that the changingstate effect is caused by interference between order processes. The present investigation found that working memory capacity predicts susceptibility to the deviation effect, but not to the changing-state effect, both when speech items (Experiment 1) and when tones (Experiment 2) produce the disruption. These results suggest that the two effects are caused by different mechanisms and support the duplex-mechanism account of auditory distraction.

1 - 3 of 3
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent 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