Abstract
The extent to which distracting items capture attention despite being irrelevant to the task at hand can be measured either implicitly or explicitly (e.g., Simons, Trends Cogn Sci 4:147–155, 2000). Implicit approaches include the standard attentional capture paradigm in which distraction is measured in terms of reaction time and/or accuracy costs within a focal task in the presence (vs. absence) of a task-irrelevant distractor. Explicit measures include the inattention paradigm in which people are asked directly about their noticing of an unexpected task-irrelevant item. Although the processes of attentional capture have been studied extensively using both approaches in the visual domain, there is much less research on similar processes as they may operate within audition, and the research that does exist in the auditory domain has tended to focus exclusively on either an explicit or an implicit approach. This paper provides an overview of recent research on auditory attentional capture, integrating the key conclusions that may be drawn from both methodological approaches.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alho, K., Woods, D. L., Algazi, A., & Näätänen, R. (1992). Intermodal selective attention. II. Effects of attentional load on processing of auditory and visual stimuli in central space. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 82, 356–368.
Bregman, A. S. (1990). Auditory scene analysis. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Dalton, P., & Fraenkel, N. (2012). Gorillas we have missed: sustained inattentional deafness for dynamic events. Cognition, 124, 367–372.
Dalton, P., & Lavie, N. (2004). Auditory attentional capture: effects of singleton distractor sounds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 180–193.
Dalton, P., & Lavie, N. (2007). Overriding auditory attentional capture. Perception and Psychophysics, 69, 162–171.
Dehais, F., Causse, M., Vachon, F., Régis, N., Menant, E., & Tremblay, S. (2013). Failure to detect critical auditory alerts in the cockpit: evidence for inattentional deafness. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. doi:10.1177/0018720813510735 (epub ahead of print).
Escera, C., Alho, K., Schröger, E., & Winkler, I. (2000). Involuntary attention and distractibility as evaluated with event-related brain potentials. Audiology and Neuro-Otology, 5, 151–166.
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.
Gomes, H., Barrett, S., Duff, M., Barnhardt, J., & Ritter, W. (2008). The effects of interstimulus interval on event-related indices of attention: an auditory selective attention test of perceptual load theory. Clinical Neurophysiology, 119, 542–555.
Hackley, S. A. (2009). The speeding of voluntary reaction by a warning signal. Psychophysiology, 46, 225–233.
Harmony, T., Bernal, J., Fernández, T., Silva-Pereyra, J., Fernández-Bouzas, A., Marosi, E., et al. (2000). Primary task demands modulate P3a amplitude. Cognitive Brain Research, 9, 53–60.
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.
Hughes, R. W. (2014). Auditory distraction: a duplex-mechanism account. PsyCh Journal, 3, 30–41.
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.
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.
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.
Jones, D. M., & Macken, W. J. (1993). Irrelevant tones produce an irrelevant speech effect: implications for phonological coding in working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 369–381.
Klapp, S. T., Marshburn, E. A., & Lester, P. T. (1983). Short-term memory does not involve working memory of information processing: the demise of a common assumption. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 112, 240–264.
Koreimann S., Strauß, S., & Vitouch, O. (2009). Inattentional deafness under dynamic musical conditions. In: Proceedings of the 7th triennial conference of European society for the cognitive sciences of music (pp. 246–249). Jyväskylä: ESCOM.
Lange, E. B. (2005). Disruption of attention by irrelevant stimuli in serial recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 53, 513–531.
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.
Macdonald, J. S., & Lavie, N. (2011). Visual perceptual load induces inattentional deafness. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 73, 1780–1789.
Mack, A., & Rock, I. (1998). Inattentional blindness. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Marsh, J. E., Hughes, R. W., & Jones, D. M. (2008). Auditory distraction in semantic memory: a process-based approach. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 682–700.
Marsh, J. E., Hughes, R. W., & Jones, D. M. (2009). Interference by process, not content, determines semantic auditory distraction. Cognition, 110, 23–38.
Most, S. B., Scholl, B. J., Clifford, E. R., & Simons, D. J. (2005). What you see is what you set: sustained inattentional blindness and the capture of awareness. Psychological Review, 112, 217–242.
Muller-Gass, A., Macdonald, M., Schröger, E., Sculthorpe, L., & Campbell, K. (2007). Evidence for the auditory P3a reflecting an automatic process: elicitation during highly-focused continuous visual attention. Brain Research, 1170, 71–78.
Muller-Gass, A., Stelmack, R. M., & Campbell, K. B. (2006). The effect of visual task difficulty and attentional direction on the detection of acoustic change as indexed by the mismatch negativity. Brain Research, 1078, 112–130.
Murphy, S., Fraenkel, N., & Dalton, P. (2013). Perceptual load does not modulate auditory distractor processing. Cognition, 129, 345–355.
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.
Nöstl, A., Marsh, J. E., & Sörqvist, P. (2012). Expectations modulate the magnitude of attentional capture by auditory events. PLoS One, 7(11), e48569.
Parmentier, F.B.R. (2014). The cognitive determinants of behavioral distraction by deviant auditory stimuli: a review. Psychological Research (in press).
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.
Parmentier, F. B. R., Elsley, J. V., Andrés, P., & Barceló, F. (2011). Why are auditory novels distracting? Contrasting the roles of novelty, violation of expectation and stimulus change. Cognition, 119, 374–380.
Parmentier, F. B. R., Elsley, J. V., & Ljungberg, J. K. (2010). Behavioral distraction by auditory novelty is not only about novelty: the role of the distracter’s informational value. Cognition, 115, 504–511.
Parmentier, F. B. R., & Hebrero, M. (2013). Cognitive control of involuntary distraction by deviant sounds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 1635–1641.
Schröger, E. (1996). A neural mechanism for involuntary attention shifts to changes in auditory stimulation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8, 527–539.
Schröger, E., & Wolff, C. (1998). Behavioral and electrophysiological effects of task-irrelevant sound change: a new distraction paradigm. Cognitive Brain Research, 7, 71–87.
Shelton, J. T., Elliott, E. M., Eaves, S. D., & Exner, A. L. (2009). The distracting effects of a ringing cell phone: an investigation of the laboratory and the classroom setting. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 513–521.
Shinn-Cunningham, B. (2008). Object-based auditory and visual attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 182–186.
Simons, D. J. (2000). Attentional capture and inattentional blindness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 147–155.
Simons, D. J., & Chabris, C. F. (1999). Gorillas in our midst: sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception, 28, 1059–1074.
Sussman, E. (2007). A new view on the MMN and attention debate: the role of context in processing auditory events. Journal of Psychophysiology, 21, 60–69.
Sussman, E., Winkler, I., & Schröger, E. (2003). Top–down control over involuntary attention switching in the auditory modality. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10, 630–637.
Vachon, F., Hughes, R. W., & Jones, D. M. (2012). Broken expectations: violation of expectancies, not novelty, captures auditory attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 164–177.
Wetzel, N., Schröger, E., & Widmann, A. (2013). The dissociation between the P3a event-related potential and behavioral distraction. Psychophysiology, 50(9), 920–930.
Wundt, W. (1880). Grundzüge der physiologischen psychologie. Leipzig: Engelmann.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dalton, P., Hughes, R.W. Auditory attentional capture: implicit and explicit approaches. Psychological Research 78, 313–320 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-014-0557-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-014-0557-5