Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The cognitive determinants of behavioral distraction by deviant auditory stimuli: a review

  • Review
  • Published:
Psychological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Numerous studies have demonstrated that rare and unexpected changes in an otherwise repetitive or structured sound sequence ineluctably break through selective attention and impact negatively on performance in an unrelated task. While the electrophysiological responses to unexpected sounds have been extensively studied, behavioral distraction has received relatively less attention until recently. In this paper, I review work examining the cognitive underpinnings of behavioral distraction by deviant sounds and highlight some of its key determinants. Evidence indicates that deviance distraction (1) derives from the time penalty associated with the involuntary orientation of attention to and away from the deviant sound and from resulting effects such as the reactivation of the relevant task set upon the presentation of the target stimulus; and (2) is mediated by a number of factors (some increasing distraction, such as aging or induced emotions; some decreasing it, such as a memory load or cognitive control). Contrary to the received view that deviants ineluctably elicit distraction, recent work demonstrates that it is contingent upon auditory distractors acting as unspecific warning signals in the service of goal-oriented behavior, and that deviants do not elicit distraction because they are rare but because they violate the cognitive system’s predictions (which can be manipulated through implicit rule learning or explicit cueing). Evidence is also presented indicating that the capture of attention by spoken deviant sounds is followed by an involuntary evaluation of their semantic properties, the outcome of which can be robust enough to linger in working memory and interfere with subsequent behavior. Finally, I review studies suggesting that behavioral deviance distraction is not the mere byproduct of the mismatch negativity, P3a and re-orientation negativity electrophysiological responses and highlight a number of outstanding questions for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. I thank Erich Schröger and Alexandra Bendixen for encouraging me to take on this endeavor.

  2. I thank János Horváth for pointing this out during the review process.

References

  • Ahveninen, J., Jääskeläinen, I. P., Pekkonen, E., Hallberg, A., Hietanen, M., Näätänen, R., et al. (2000). Increased distractibility by task-irrelevant sound changes in abstinent alcoholics. Clinical Experimental Research, 24, 1850–1854.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrés, P., Parmentier, F. B. R., & Escera, C. (2006). The effect of age on the involuntary capture of attention by irrelevant sounds: A test of the frontal hypothesis of aging. Neuropsychologia, 44, 2564–2568.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bendixen, A., Grimm, S., Deouell, L. Y., Wetzel, N., Mädebach, A., & Schröger, E. (2010). The time-course of auditory and visual distraction effects in a new crossmodal paradigm. Neuropsychologia, 48, 2131–2139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendixen, A., Prinz, W., Horváth, J., Trujillo-Barreto, N. J., & Schröger, E. (2008). Rapid extraction of auditory feature contingencies. Neuroimage, 41, 1111–1119.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bendixen, A., Roeber, U., & Schröger, E. (2007). Regularity extraction and application in dynamic auditory stimulus sequences. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 1664–1677.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bendixen, A., SanMiguel, I., & Schröger, E. (2013). Early electrophysiological indicators of predictive processing in audition: A review. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 83, 120–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendixen, A., & Schröger, E. (2008). Memory trace formation for abstract auditory features and its consequences in different attention contexts. Biological Psychology, 78, 231–241.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bendixen, A., Schröger, E., Ritter, W., & Winkler, I. (2012). Regularity extraction from non-adjacent sounds. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 143. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00143.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bendixen, A., Schröger, E., & Winkler, I. (2009). I heard that coming: Event-related potential evidence for stimulus-driven prediction in the auditory system. Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 8447–8451.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berti, S. (2008a). Cognitive control after distraction: Event-related brain potentials (ERPs) dissociate between different processes of attentional allocation. Psychophysiology, 45, 608–620.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berti, S. (2008b). Object switching within working memory is reflected in the human event-related brain potential. Neuroscience Letters, 434, 200–205.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berti, S. (2012). Automatic processing of rare versus novel auditory stimuli reveal different mechanisms of auditory change detection. NeuroReport, 23, 441–446.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berti, S. (2013). The role of auditory transient and deviance processing in distraction of task performance: A combined behavioral and event-related brain potential study. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 352. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00352.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berti, S., Grunwald, M., & Schröger, E. (2013). Age dependent changes of distractibility and reorienting of attention revisited: An event-related potential study. Brain Research, 1491, 156–166.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berti, S., Roeber, U., & Schröger, E. (2004). Bottom-up influences on working memory: Behavioral and electrophysiological distraction varies with distractor strength. Experimental Psychology, 51, 249–257.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berti, S., & Schröger, E. (2001). A comparison of auditory and visual distraction: Behavioral and event-related indices. Cognitive Brain Research, 10, 265–273. doi:10.1016/S0926-6410(00)00044-6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berti, S., & Schröger, E. (2003). Working memory controls involuntary attention switching: Evidence from an auditory distraction paradigm. European Journal of Neuroscience, 17, 1119–1122. doi:10.1046/j.1460-9568.2003.02527.x.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berti, S., & Schröger, E. (2004). Distraction effects in vision: Behavioral and event-related potential indices. NeuroReport, 15, 665–669.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bodenhausen, G. V., Gabriel, S., & Lineberger, M. (2000). Sadness and susceptibility to judgmental bias: The case of anchoring. Psychological Science, 11, 320–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boll, S., & Berti, S. (2009). Distraction of task-relevant information processing by irrelevant changes in auditory, visual, and bimodal stimulus features: A behavioral and event-related potential study. Psychophysiology, 46, 645–654.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Botvinick, M. M., Cohen, J. D., & Carter, C. S. (2004). Conflict monitoring and anterior cingulate cortex: An update. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 539–546.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boulter, L. R. (1977). Attention and reaction times to signals of uncertain modality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 379–388.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bubic, A., von Cramon, D. Y., Jacobsen, T., Schröger, E., & Schubotz, R. I. (2008). Violation of expectation: Neural correlate reflect bases of prediction. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21, 155–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchner, A., Zabal, A., & Mayr, S. (2003). Auditory, visual, and cross-modal negative priming. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 917–923.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bugg, J. M., Jacoby, L. L., & Toth, J. P. (2008). Multiple levels of control in the Stroop task. Memory& Cognition, 36, 1484–1494.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bush, G., Whalen, P. J., Rosen, B. R., Jenike, M. A., McInerney, S. C., & Rauch, S. L. (1998). The counting stroop: An interference task specialized for functional neuroimaging—validation study with functional MRI. Human Brain Mapping, 6, 270–282.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cashdollar, N., Fukuda, K., Bocklage, A., Aurtenetxe, S., Vogel, E. K., & Gazzaley, A. (2013). Prolonged disengagement from attentional capture in normal aging. Psychology and Aging, 28, 77–86.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cheal, M., & Gregory, M. (1997). Evidence of limited capacity and noise reduction with single-element displays in the location-cuing paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 51–71.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, Y.-C., Aron, A. R., & Verbruggen, F. (2012). Response suppression by automatic retrieval of stimulus–stop association: Evidence from transcranial magnetic stimulation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24, 1908–1918.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Costa-Faidella, J., Grimm, S., Slabu, L., Díaz-Santaella, F., & Escera, C. (2011). Multiple time scales of adaptation in the auditory system as revealed by human evoked potentials. Psychophysiology, 48, 774–783.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Czigler, I., Cox, T. J., Gyimesi, K., & Horváth, J. (2007). Event-related potential study to aversive auditory stimuli. Neuroscience Letters, 420, 251–256.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Czigler, I., & Winkler, I. (2012). Evidence from auditory and visual event-related potential (ERP) studies of deviance detection (MMN and vMMN) linking predictive coding theories and perceptual object representations. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 83, 132–143.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Domínguez-Borràs, J., Garcia-Garcia, M., & Escera, C. (2008). Emotional context enhances auditory novelty processing: Behavioural and electrophysiological evidence. European Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 1199–1206.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Drazin, D. H. (1961). Effects of foreperiod, variability, and probability of stimulus occurrence on simple reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 43–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, E. M., & Cowan, N. (2001). Habituation to auditory distracters in a cross-modal, color–word interference task. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 654–667.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, E. M., Cowan, N., & Valle-Inclan, F. (1998). The nature of cross-modal color–word interference effects. Perception & Psychophysics, 60, 761–767.

    Google Scholar 

  • Escera, C., Alho, K., Winkler, I., & Näätänen, R. (1998). Neural mechanisms of involuntary attention to acoustic novelty and change. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 590–604.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Escera, C., Yago, E., & Alho, K. (2001). Electrical responses reveal the temporal dynamics of brain events during involuntary attention switching. European Journal of Neuroscience, 14, 877–883.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Escera, C., Yago, E., Corral, M. J., Corbera, S., & Nuñez, M. I. (2003). Attention capture by auditory significant stimuli: Semantic analysis follows attention switching. European Journal of Neuroscience, 18, 2408–2412.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fan, J., Flombaum, J. J., McCandliss, B. D., Thomas, K. M., & Posner, M. I. (2003). Cognitive and brain consequences of conflict. Neuroimage, 18, 42–57.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fan, J., Kolster, R., Ghajar, J., Suh, M., Knight, R. T., Sarkar, R., et al. (2007). Response anticipation and response conflict: An event-related potential and functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 2272–2282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frangos, J., Ritter, W., & Friedman, D. (2005). Brain potentials to sexually suggestive whistles show meaning modulates the mismatch negativity. NeuroReport, 16, 1313–1317.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, D., Cycowicz, Y. M., & Dziobek, I. (2003). Cross-form conceptual relations between sounds and words: Effects on the novelty P3. Cognitive Brain Research, 18, 58–64.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, D., Cycowicz, Y. M., & Gaeta, H. (2001). The novelty P3: An event-related brain potential (ERP) sign of the brain’s evaluation of novelty. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 25, 355–373.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Getzmann, S., Gajewski, P. D., & Falkenstein, M. (2013). Does age increase auditory distraction? Electrophysiological correlates of high and low performance in seniors. Neurobiology of Aging, 34, 1952–1962.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grillon, C., Courchesne, E., Ameli, R., Geyer, M., & Braff, D. L. (1990). Increased distractibility in schizophrenic patients. Archives of General Psychiatry, 47, 171–179.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grimm, S., Bendixen, A., Deouell, L. Y., & Schröger, S. (2009). Distraction in a visual multi-deviant paradigm: Behavioral and event-related potential effects. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 72, 260–266.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grimm, S., Schröger, E., Bendixen, A., Bäß, P., Roye, A., & Deouell, L. Y. (2008). Optimizing the auditory distraction paradigm: Behavioral and event-related potential effects in a lateralized multi-deviant approach. Clinical Neurophysiology, 119, 934–947.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gross, J. J. (1998). Antecedent- and response-focused emotion regulation: Divergent consequences for experience, expression, and physiology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 224–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haenschel, C., Vernon, D. J., Dwivedi, P., Gruzelier, J. H., & Baldeweg, T. (2005). Event-related brain potential correlates of human auditory sensory memory-trace formation. Journal of Neuroscience, 9, 10494–10501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanauer, J. B., & Brooks, P. J. (2003). Developmental change in the cross-modal Stroop effect. Perception & Psychophysics, 65, 359–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, N. (1980). Non-informative effects of stimuli functioning as cues. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 413–425.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, C., & Spence, C. (2006). Verbal interface design: Do verbal directional cues automatically orient visual spatial attention? Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 733–748.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hölig, C., & Berti, S. (2010). To switch of not to switch: Brain potential indices of attentional control after task-relevant and task-irrelevant changes of stimulus features. Brain Research, 1345, 164–175.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Horváth, J., & Bendixen, A. (2012). Preventing distraction by probabilistic cueing. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 83, 342–347.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Horváth, J., & Burgyán, A. (2011). Distraction and the auditory attentional blink. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 73, 695–701.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horváth, J., Czigler, I., Birkás, E., Winkler, I., & Gervai, J. (2009). Age-related differences in distraction and reorientation in an auditory task. Neurobiology of Aging, 30, 1157–1172.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Horváth, J., Roeber, U., Bendixen, A., & Schröger, E. (2008a). Specific or general? The nature of attention set changes triggered by distracting auditory events. Brain Research, 1229, 193–203.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Horváth, J., Sussman, E., Winkler, I., & Schröger, E. (2011). Preventing distraction: Assessing stimulus-specific and general effects of the predictive cueing of deviant auditory events. Biological Psychology, 87, 35–48.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Horváth, J., & Winkler, I. (2010). Distraction in a continuous-stimulation detection task. Biological Psychology, 83, 229–238.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Horváth, J., Winkler, I., & Bendixen, A. (2008b). Do N1/MMN, P3a, and RON form a strongly coupled chain reflecting the three stages of auditory distraction? Biological Psychology, 79, 139–147.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, R. W., Hurlstone, M. J., Marsh, J. E., Vachon, F., & Jones, D. M. (2013). Cognitive control of auditory distraction: Impact of task difficulty, foreknowledge, and working memory capacity supports duplex-mechanism account. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 539–553.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, R. W., Vachon, F., & Jones, D. M. (2005). Auditory attentional capture during serial recall—violations at encoding of an algorithm-based neural model. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 736–749.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, R. W., Vachon, F., & Jones, D. M. (2007). Disruption of short-term memory by changing and deviant sounds—support for a duplex-mechanism account of auditory distraction. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 1050–1061.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Itti, L., & Baldi, P. (2009). Bayesian surprise attracts human attention. Vision Research, 49, 1295–1306.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jääskeläinen, I. P., Alho, K., Escera, C., Winkler, I., Sillanaukee, P., & Näätänen, R. (1996). Effects of ethanol and auditory distraction on forced choice reaction time. Alcohol, 13, 153–156.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jankowiak, S., & Berti, S. (2007). Behavioral and event-related potential distraction effects with regularly occurring auditory deviants. Psychophysiology, 44, 79–85.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jentzsch, I., & Dudschig, C. (2009). Why do we slow down after an error? Mechanisms underlying the effects of post-error slowing. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 209–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kähkönen, S., Ahveninen, J., Pekkonen, E., Kaakkola, S., Huttunen, R. J., & Jääskeläinen, I. P. (2002). Dopamine modulates involuntary shifting and reorienting: An electromagnetic study. Clinical Neurophysiology, 113, 1894–1902.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kane, M. J., & Engle, R. W. (2003). Working-memory capacity and the control of attention: The contributions of goal neglect, response competition, and task set to Stroop interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 47–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiesel, A., Kunde, W., & Hoffman, J. (2006). Evidence of task-specific resolution of response conflict. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 800–806.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koch, I., & Brass, M. (2013). Task switching—maturation of a paradigm. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 221, 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kujala, T., Tervaniemi, M., & Schröger, E. (2007). The mismatch negativity in cognitive and clinical neuroscience: Theoretical and methodological considerations. Biological Psychology, 74, 1–19.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kunde, W. (2003). Sequential modulations of stimulus–response correspondence effects depend on awareness of response conflict. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 198–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laming, D. R. J. (1979). Choice reaction performance following an error. Acta Psychologica, 43, 199–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawo, V., Philipp, A. M., Schuch, S., & Koch, I. (2012). The role of task preparation and task inhibition in age-related task-switching deficits. Psychology and Aging, 27, 1130–1137.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

  • Li, C.-S. R., Huang, C., Yan, P., Paliwal, P., Constable, R. T., & Sinha, R. (2008). Neural correlates of post-error slowing during a stop signal task—a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 1021–1029.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, B., Parmentier, F. B. R., & Zhang, M. (2013). Behavioral distraction by auditory deviance is mediated by the sound’s informational value: Evidence from an auditory discrimination task. Experimental Psychology, 60, 260–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ljungberg, J. K., & Parmentier, F. B. R. (2012a). The impact of intonation and valence on objective and subjective attention capture by auditory alarms. Human Factors, 54, 826–837.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ljungberg, J. K., & Parmentier, F. B. R. (2012b). Cross-modal distraction by deviance: Functional similarities between the auditory and tactile modalities. Experimental Psychology, 59, 355–363.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ljungberg, J. K., Parmentier, F. B. R., Hughes, R. W., Macken, W. J., & Jones, D. M. (2012a). Listen out! Behavioral and subjective responses to verbal warnings. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 451–461.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ljungberg, J. K., Parmentier, F. B. R., Leiva, A., & Vega, N. (2012b). The informational constraints of behavioral distraction by unexpected sounds: The role of event information. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 1461–1468.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luce, R. D. (1986). Response times. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luck, S. J., Hillyard, S. A., Mouloua, M., & Hawkins, H. L. (1996). Mechanisms of visual-spatial attention: Resource allocation or uncertainty reduction? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 725–737.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Macdonald, A. W., I. I. I., Cohen, J. D., Stenger, V. A., & Carter, C. S. (2000). Dissociating the role of the dorsolateral prefrontal and anterior cingulated cortex in cognitive control. Science, 288, 1835–1838.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mager, R., Falkenstein, M., Störmer, R., Brand, S., Müller-Spahn, F., & Bullinger, A. (2004). Auditory distraction in young and middle-aged adults: A behavioural and event-related potential study. Journal of Neural Transmission, 112, 1165–1176.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • May, C. P., Kane, M. J., & Zacks, R. T. (1995). Determinants of negative priming. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 35–54.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meiran, N., Chorev, Z., & Sapir, A. (2000). Component processes in task switching. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 211–243.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Melara, R. D., Wang, H., Vu, K.-P. L., & Proctor, R. W. (2008). Attentional origins of the Simon effect: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Brain Research, 1215, 147–159.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Melcher, T., & Gruber, O. (2009). Decomposing interference during Stroop performance into different conflict factors: An event-related fMRI study. Cortex, 45, 189–200.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Munka, L., & Berti, S. (2006). Examining task-dependencies of different attentional processes as reflected in the P3a and reorienting negativity components of the human event-related brain potential. Neuroscience Letters, 396, 177–181.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Näätänen, R. (1990). The role of attention in auditory information processing as revealed by event-related potentials and other brain measures of cognitive function. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 13, 201–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Näätänen, R. (1992). Attention and brain function. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Näätänen, R., Gaillard, A. W. K., & Mäntysalo, S. (1978). Early selective-attention effect on evoked potential reinterpreted. Acta Psychologica, 42, 313–329.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Näätänen, R., & Winkler, I. (1999). The concept of auditory stimulus representation in cognitive neuroscience. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 826–859.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemi, P., & Näätänen, R. (1981). Foreperiod and simple reaction time. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 133–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordby, H., Roth, W. T., & Pfefferbaum, A. (1988). Event-related potentials to breaks in sequences of alternating pitches or interstimulus intervals. Psychophysiology, 25, 262–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nöstl, A., Marsh, J., & Sörqvist, P. (2012). Expectations modulate the magnitude of attentional capture by auditory events. PLoS ONE, 7(11), e48569. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0048569.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Notebaert, W., Houtman, F., Van Opstal, F., Gevers, W., Fias, W., & Verguts, T. (2009). Post-error slowing: An orienting account. Cognition, 111, 275–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Núñez Castellar, E., Küin, S., Fias, W., & Notebaert, W. (2010). Outcome expectancy and not accuracy determines posterror slowing: ERP Support. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 10, 270–278.

  • Paavilainen, P., Arajärvi, P., & Takegata, R. (2007). Preattentive detection of nonsalient contingencies between auditory features. Neuroreport, 18, 159–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paavilainen, P., Simola, J., Jaramillo, M., Näätänen, R., Winkler, I. (2001). Preattentive extraction of abstract feature conjunctions from auditory stimulation as reflected by the mismatch negativity (MMN). Psychophysiology, 38, 359–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pacheco-Unguetti, A. P., & Parmentier, F. B. R. (2013). Sadness increases distraction by auditory deviant stimuli. Emotion. doi:10.1037/a0034289 (Advance online publication).

  • Parmentier, F. B. R. (2008). Towards a cognitive model of distraction by auditory novelty: The role of involuntary attention capture and semantic processing. Cognition, 109, 345–362.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parmentier, F. B. R., & Andrés, P. (2010). The involuntary capture of attention by sound: Novelty and post-novelty distraction in young and older adults. Experimental Psychology, 57, 68–76.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parmentier, F. B. R., Elford, G., Escera, C., Andrés, P., & San Miguel, I. (2008). The cognitive locus of distraction by acoustic novelty in the cross-modal oddball task. Cognition, 106, 408–432.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parmentier, F. B. R., Elsley, J. V., Andrés, P., & Barceló, F. (2011a). Why are auditory novels distracting? Contrasting the roles of novelty, violation of expectation and stimulus change. Cognition, 119, 374–380.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parmentier, F. B. R., Elsley, J. V., & Ljungberg, J. K. (2010a). Behavioral distraction by auditory novelty is not only about novelty: The role of the distracter’s informational value. Cognition, 115, 504–511.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parmentier, F. B. R., Elsley, J., & Maybery, M. T. (2010b). The involuntary capture of attention by novel feature pairings: A study of voice–location integration in auditory sensory memory. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 72, 279–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parmentier, F. B. R., & Hebrero, M. (2013). Cognitive control of involuntary distraction by deviant sound. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 1635–1641.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parmentier, F. B. R., Ljungberg, J. K., Elsley, J. V., & Lindkvist, M. (2011b). A behavioral study of distraction by vibrotactile novelty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 1134–1139.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parmentier, F. B. R., Turner, J., & Elsley, J. V. (2011c). Distraction by auditory novelty: The course and aftermath of novelty and semantic effects. Experimental Psychology, 58, 92–101.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parmentier, F. B. R., Turner, J., & Perez, L. (2013). A dual contribution to the involuntary semantic processing of unexpected spoken words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. doi:10.1037/a0031550 (Advance online publication).

  • Rabbitt, P. M. A. (1966). Errors and error correction in choice reaction tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 264–272.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reiche, M., Hartwigsen, G., Widmann, A., Saur, D., Schröger, E., & Bendixen, A. (2013). Involuntary attentional capture by speech and non-speech deviations: A combined behavioral—event-related potential study. Brain Research, 1490, 153–160.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rinne, T., Särkkä, A., Dergerman, A., Schröger, E., & Alho, K. (2006). Two separate mechanisms underlie auditory change detection and involuntary control of attention. Brain Research, 1077, 135–143.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roeber, U., Berti, S., Müller, D., Widmann, A., & Schröger, E. (2009). Disentangling effects of auditory distraction and of stimulus–response sequence. Psychophysiology, 46, 425–438.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roeber, U., Berti, S., Widmann, A., & Schröger, E. (2005). Response repetition vs. response change modulates behavioral and electrophysiological effects of distraction. Cognitive Brain Research, 22, 451–456.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roeber, U., Widmann, A., & Schröger, E. (2003). Auditory distraction by duration and location deviants: A behavioral and event-related potential study. Cognitive Brain Research, 17, 347–357.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roelofs, A. (2005). The visual–auditory color–word Stroop asymmetry and its time course. Memory & Cognition, 33, 1325–1336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). The cost of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roye, A., Jacobsen, T., & Schröger, E. (2007). Personal significance is encoded automatically by the human brain: An event-related potential study with ringtones. European Journal of Neuroscience, 26, 784–790.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • SanMiguel, I., Corral, M. J., & Escera, C. (2008). When loading working memory reduces distraction: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence from an auditory–visual distraction paradigm. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 1131–1145.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • SanMiguel, I., Linden, D., & Escera, C. (2010a). Attention capture by novel sounds: Distraction versus facilitation. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 22, 481–515.

    Google Scholar 

  • SanMiguel, I., Morgan, H. M., Klein, C., Linden, D., & Escera, C. (2010b). On the functional significance of Novelty-P3: Facilitation by unexpected novel sounds. Biological Psychology, 83, 143–152.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Santens, S., & Verguts, T. (2011). The size congruity effect: Is bigger always more? Cognition, 118, 94–110.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schröger, E. (1996). A neural mechanism for involuntary attention shifts to changes in auditory stimulation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8, 527–539.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schröger, E. (1997). On the detection of auditory deviations: A pre-attentive activation model. Psychophysiology, 34, 245–257.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schröger, E. (2005). The mismatch negativity as a tool to study auditory processing. Acta Acustica United with Acustica, 91, 490–501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schröger, E. (2007). Mismatch negativity: A microphone into auditory memory. Journal of Psychophysiology, 21, 138–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schröger, E., Bendixen, A., Trujillo-Barreto, N. J., & Roeber, U. (2007). Processing of abstract rule violations in audition. PLoS ONE, 2, e1131.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schröger, E., Giard, M.-H., & Wolff, Ch. (2000). Auditory distraction: Event-related potential and behavioral indices. Clinical Neurophysiology, 111, 1450–1460.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schröger, E., & Wolff, C. (1998a). Attentional orienting and reorienting is indicated by human event-related brain potentials. NeuroReport, 9, 3355–3358.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schröger, E., & Wolff, C. (1998b). Behavioral and electrophysiological effects of task-irrelevant sound change: A new distraction paradigm. Cognitive Brain Research, 7, 71–87.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schuch, S., & Koch, I. (2010). Response-repetition effects in task switching with and without response execution. Acta Psychologica, 135, 302–309.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shiu, L., & Pashler, H. (1994). Negligible effect of spatial precuing on identification of single digits. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 1037–1054.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shtyrov, Y., Hauk, O., & Pulvermüller, F. (2004). Distributed neuronal networks for encoding category-specific semantic information: The mismatch negativity to action words. European Journal of Neuroscience, 19, 1083–1092.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sussman, E., Winkler, I., & Schröger, E. (2003). Top-down control over involuntary attention switching in the auditory modality. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 630–637.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilman, C. M., & Wiens, S. (2011). Behavioral and ERP indices of response conflict in Stroop and flanker tasks. Psychophysiology, 48, 1405–1411.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turatto, M., Benso, F., Galfano, G., & Umiltà, C. (2002). Nonspatial attentional shifts between audition and vision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 628–639.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ullsperger, M., & von Cramon, D. Y. (2001). Subprocesses of performance monitoring: A dissociation of error processing and response competition revealed by event-related fMRI and ERPs. Neuroimage, 14, 1387–1401.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van Mourik, R., Oosterlaan, J., Heslenfeld, D. J., Konig, C. E., & Sergeant, J. A. (2007). When distraction is not distracting: A behavioral and ERP study on distraction in ADHD. Clinical Neurophysiology, 118, 1855–1865.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Veen, V., & Carter, C. S. (2005). Separating semantic conflict and response conflict in the Stroop task: a functional MRI study. Neuroimage, 27, 497–504.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Zuijen, T. L., Simoens, V. L., Paavilainen, P., Näätänen, R. & Tervaniemi, M. (2006) Implicit, intuitive and explicit knowledge of abstract regularities in a sound sequence: An event-related brain potential study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 1292–1303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verbruggen, F., & Logan, G. D. (2008). Automatic and controlled response inhibition: Associative learning in the go/no-go and stop-signal paradigms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 649–672.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wacongne, C., Changeux, J. P., & Dehaene, S. (2012). A neuronal model of predictive coding accounting for the mismatch negativity. Journal of Neuroscience, 32, 3665–3678.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wessel, J.R., Danielmeier, C., Morton, B., & Ullsperger, M. (2012). Surprise and error: Common neuronalarchitecture for the processing of errors and novelty. Journal of Neuroscience, 32, 7528–7537.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wetzel, N., Berti, S., Widmann, A., & Schröger, E. (2004). Distraction and reorientation in children: A behavioral and ERP study. NeuroReport, 15, 1355–1358.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wetzel, N., & Schröger, E. (2007). Cognitive control of involuntary attention and distraction in children and adolescents. Brain Research, 1155, 134–146.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wetzel, N., Schröger, E., & Widmann, A. (2013). The dissociation between the P3a event-related potential and behavioral distraction. Psychophysiology (in press).

  • Wetzel, N., Widmann, A., & Schröger, E. (2009). The cognitive control of distraction by novelty in children aged 7–8 and adults. Psychophysiology, 46, 607–616.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wetzel, N., Widmann, A., & Schröger, E. (2012). Distraction and facilitation—two faces of the same coin? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 664–674.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Winkler, I. (2007). Interpreting the mismatch negativity. Journal of Psychophysiology, 21, 147–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winkler, I., & Czigler, I. (1998). Mismatch negativity: deviance detection or the maintenance of the “standard”. NeuroReport, 9, 3809–3813.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woods, D. L. (1992). Auditory selective attention in middleaged and elderly subjects: An event-related brain potential study. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 84, 456–468.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yeung, N., Cohen, J. D., & Botvinick, M. M. (2004). The neural basis of error detection: Conflict monitoring and the error-related negativity. Psychological Review, 111, 939–959.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by a research grant from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (PSI-2009-08427) and Plan E, as well as a Ramon y Cajal Fellowship (RYC-2007-00701) awarded to Fabrice Parmentier.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology and Research Institute of Health Sciences, Neuropsychology and Cognition Group, University of the Balearic Islands, Ctra. De Valldemossa, Km 7.5, Palma de Mallorca, Balearic Islands, Spain

    Fabrice B. R. Parmentier

  2. Department of Psychology, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia

    Fabrice B. R. Parmentier

Authors
  1. Fabrice B. R. Parmentier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fabrice B. R. Parmentier.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Parmentier, F.B.R. The cognitive determinants of behavioral distraction by deviant auditory stimuli: a review. Psychological Research 78, 321–338 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-013-0534-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-013-0534-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation