Abstract
A number of studies have shown that performance of identification and discrimination tasks is detrimentally affected by irrelevant information, yet other studies have failed to find such decrements. It is suggested that these contradictory findings depend on whether S must make difficult discriminations among the relevant stimuli, the irrelevant stimuli, or between the relevant and irrelevant stimuli. The role of irrelevant information in these tasks is to enhance or amplify the competihg responses engendered by the difficult discriminations. Irrelevant information enhances competing responses by increasing the information processing requirements of a task. The results of various studies of irrelevant information seem to be in good agreement with the assertions.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Archer, E. J. Identification of visual patterns as a function of information load. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1954, 48, 313–317.
Broadbent, D. E.Perception and communication. New York: Pergamon, 1958.
Egeth, H. E. Parallel versus serial processes in multidimensional stimulus discrimination. Perception & Psychophysics, 1966, 1, 245–252.
Egeth, H. Selective attention. Psychological Bulletin. 1967, 67, 41–57.
Egeth, H., & Bevan, W. Attention. In B. Woiman (Ed.),Handbook of psychology. Englewood Cliffs. N.J: Prentice-Hall. 1972.
Ellis, H.The transfer of learning. New York: Macmillan. 1965.
Fitts, P. M., & Biederman. I. S-R compatibdity and information reduction. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1965, 69, 408–412
Goldsteln, I. Effects of stimulus complexity and restrictive responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1966, 71. 104–108.
Hodge, M. H. The influence of irrelevant reformation upon complex visual discrimination. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1959, 57, 1–5.
Hodge, M. H., & Reid, L. S. The influence of similarity between relevant and irrelevant information upon a complex identification task. Perception & Psychophysics. 1971, 10, 193–196.
Imai, S., & Garner, W. R. Discriminability and preference for attributes in free and constrained classification. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1965, 69, 596–608.
McGeoch, J. A., & Irion. A. L.Tile psychology of human learning. (2nd ed.) New York Longmans, Green. 1952.
Montague, W. E. Effect of irrelevant information on a complex auditory-discrimination task. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1965, 69, 230–236
Morgan, B. B., Jr., & Allmsi, E. A. Effects of discriminability and irrelevant information on absolute judgments. Perception & Psychophysics, 1967, 2, 54–58.
Morin, R. E., Forrin, B., & Archer, W. Information processing behavior. The role of irrelevant sttrnulus reformation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1961, 61, 89–96.
Noble, C. E. Human trial-and-error learning. Psychological Reports, 1957, 3, 377–398.
Osgood, C.E. The similarity paradox in human learning A resolution. Psychological Review, 1949, 56, 132–143
Posner, M. I Information reduction in the anlysis of sequential tasks Psychological Review, 1964, 71, 491–504.
Posner, M. I., & Boies, S. J. Components of attention. Psychological Review, 1971, 78, 391–408.
Postman, L. The present status of interference theory. In C. N. Cofer (Ed.).Verbal learning and verbal behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill. 1961. Pp. 152–179.
Stroop, J. R. Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1935, 18, 643–661.
Well, A. D. The influence of irrelevant information on speeded classification tasks. Perception & Psychophysics, 1971, 10, 79–84.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
The author wishes to thank Clyde E. Neble and Howard Egeth for their critical reading of the manuscript.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hodge, M.H. Competing responses and the processing of irrelevant information. Memory & Cognition 1, 124–128 (1973). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198080
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198080