Evidence for habituation of the irrelevant-sound effect on serial recall
- 1.1k Downloads
Working memory theories make opposing predictions as to whether the disruptive effect of task-irrelevant sound on serial recall should be attenuated after repeated exposure to the auditory distractors. Although evidence of habituation has emerged after a passive listening phase, previous attempts to observe habituation to to-be ignored distractors on a trial-by-trial basis have proven to be fruitless. With the present study, we suggest that habituation to auditory distractors occurs, but has often been overlooked because past attempts to measure habituation in the irrelevant-sound paradigm were not sensitive enough. In a series of four experiments, the disruptive effects of to-be-ignored speech and music relative to a quiet control condition were markedly reduced after eight repetitions, regardless of whether trials were presented in blocks (Exp. 1) or in a random order (Exp. 2). The auditory distractor’s playback direction (forward, backward) had no effect (Exp. 3). The same results were obtained when the auditory distractors were only presented in a retention interval after the presentation of the to-be-remembered items (Exp. 4). This pattern is only consistent with theoretical accounts that allow for attentional processes to interfere with the maintenance of information in working memory.
KeywordsIrrelevant sound effect Working memory Attentional orienting Serial recall Selective attention
This research was supported by Grant BU 945/8-1 from the German Research Foundation (DFG).
- Beaman, C. P., & Röer, J. P. (2009). Learning and failing to learn in immediate memory. In N. Taatgen & H. van Rijn (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 395–400). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (Revth ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Cowan, N. (1995). Attention and memory: An integrated framework. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.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. doi: 10.1037/0278-7318.104.22.1680 PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Miles, C., Jones, D. M., & Madden, C. A. (1991). Locus of the irrelevant speech effect in short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 578–584.Google Scholar
- Neath, I., & Surprenant, A. M. (2001). The irrelevant sound effect is not always the same as the irrelevant speech effect. In H. L. Roediger III, J. S. Nairne, I. Neath, & A. M. Surprenant (Eds.), The nature of remembering: Essays in honor of Robert G. Crowder (pp. 247–265). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Röer, J. P., Bell, R., & Buchner, A. (in press). Self-relevance increases the irrelevant speech effect: Attentional disruption by one’s own name. Journal of Cognitive Psychology. doi: 10.1080/20445911.2013.828063