Auditory distraction can be studied online! A direct comparison between in-Person and online experimentationFootnote

* Stage 2 Manuscript in the Journal of Cognitive Psychology. The Stage 1 manuscript included a different title, “Can the Irrelevant Sound Effect be Studied Online?”; However, we used a new title for the Stage 2 manuscript to reflect the findings.

References

• Banbury, S. P., Macken, W. J., Tremblay, S., & Jones, D. M. (2001). Auditory distraction and short-term memory: Phenomena and practical implications. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 43(1), 12–29. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1518/001872001775992462
   Google Scholar
• Beaman, C. P. (2005). Auditory distraction from low-intensity noise: A review of the consequences for learning and workplace environments. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 19(8), 1041–1064. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1134
   Google Scholar
• Beaman, C. P., & Jones, D. M. (1997). Role of serial order in the irrelevant speech effect: Tests of the changing-state hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23(2), 459–471. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.23.2.459
   Google Scholar
• Bell, R., Dentale, S., Buchner, A., & Mayr, S. (2010). ERP correlates of the irrelevant sound effect. Psychophysiology, 47(6), 1182–1191. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.01029.x
   Google Scholar
• Bell, R., Röer, J. P., Dentale, S., & Buchner, A. (2012). Habituation of the irrelevant sound effect: Evidence for an attentional theory of short-term memory disruption. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(6), 1542. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028459
   Google Scholar
• Bell, R., Röer, J. P., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2019). Distraction by steady-state sounds: Evidence for a graded attentional model of auditory distraction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 45(4), 500–512. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000623
   Google Scholar
• Benfield, J. A., & Szlemko, W. J. (2006). Internet-based data collection: Promises and realities. Journal of Research Practice, 2(2), D1–D1. http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/30/51
   Google Scholar
• Ben-Shachar, M. S., Lüdecke, D., & Makowski, D. (2020). Effectsize: Estimation of effect size indices and standardized parameters. Journal of Open Source Software, 5(56), 2815. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.02815
   Google Scholar
• Berger, J. O., & Berry, D. A. (1988). Statistical analysis and the illusion of objectivity. American Scientist, 76(2), 159–165. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27855070
   Google Scholar
• Bregman, A. S. (1990). Auditory scene analysis: The perceptual organization of sound. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brysbaert, M. (2019). How many participants do we have to include in properly powered experiments? A tutorial of power analysis with reference tables. Journal of Cognition, 2(1), 16. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.72
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, T., Beaman, C. P., & Berry, D. C. (2002). Auditory memory and the irrelevant sound effect: Further evidence for changing-state disruption. Memory (Hove, England), 10(3), 199–214. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210143000335
   Google Scholar
• Colle, H. A., & Welsh, A. (1976). Acoustic masking in primary memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15(1), 17–31. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(76)90003-7
   Google Scholar
• Cowan, N. (1995). Attention and memory: An integrated framework. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dienes, Z. (2016). How Bayes factors change scientific practice. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 72, 78–89. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2015.10.003
   Google Scholar
• Dorsi, J., Viswanathan, N., Rosenblum, L. D., & Dias, J. W. (2018). The role of speech fidelity in the irrelevant sound effect: Insights from noise-vocoded speech backgrounds. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71(10), 2152–2161. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021817739257
   Google Scholar
• Ellermeier, W., & Hellbrück, J. (1998). Is level irrelevant in "irrelevant speech"? Effects of loudness, signal-to-noise ratio, and binaural unmasking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24(5), 1406–1414. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.24.5.1406
   Google Scholar
• Ellermeier, W., & Zimmer, K. (1997). Individual differences in susceptibility to the “irrelevant speech effect”. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 102(4), 2191–2199. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1121/1.419596
   Google Scholar
• Ellermeier, W., & Zimmer, K. (2014). The psychoacoustics of the irrelevant sound effect. Acoustical Science and Technology, 35(1), 10–16. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1250/ast.35.10
   Google Scholar
• Elliott, E. M. (2002). The irrelevant-speech effect and children: Theoretical implications of developmental change. Memory & Cognition, 30(3), 478–487. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194948
   Google Scholar
• Elliott, E. M., Marsh, J. E., Zeringue, J., & McGill, C. I. (2020). Are individual differences in auditory processing related to auditory distraction by irrelevant sound? A replication study Memory & Cognition, 48(1), 145–157. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-019-00968-8
   Google Scholar
• Henninger, F., Shevchenko, Y., Mertens, U. K., Kieslich, P. J., & Hilbig, B. E. (2019, January 16). lab.js: A free, open, online study builder.
   Google Scholar
• Hughes, R. W. (2014). Auditory distraction: A duplex-mechanism account. PsyCh Journal, 3(1), 30–41. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/pchj.44
   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(2), 539–553. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029064
   Google Scholar
• Hughes, R. W., & Marsh, J. E. (2017). The functional determinants of short-term memory: Evidence from perceptual-motor interference in verbal serial recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43(4), 537–551. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000325
   Google Scholar
• Hughes, R. W., & Marsh, J. E. (2020). When is forewarned forearmed? Predicting auditory distraction in short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46(3), 427–442. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000736
   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(6), 1050–1061. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.33.6.1050
   Google Scholar
• JASP Team. (2018). JASP (version 0.14)[Computer software]. https://jasp-stats.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, C., & Thomsen, J. P. F. (2014). Self-reported cheating in web surveys on political knowledge. Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, 48(6), 3343–3354. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-013-9960-z
   Google Scholar
• Jones, D., Farrand, P., Stuart, G., & Morris, N. (1995). Functional equivalence of verbal and spatial information in serial short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(4), 1008–1018. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.21.4.1008
   Google Scholar
• Jones, D., Madden, C., & Miles, C. (1992). Privileged access by irrelevant speech to short-term memory: The role of changing state. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 44(4), 645–669. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/14640749208401304
   Google Scholar
• 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(2), 369–381. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.19.2.369
   Google Scholar
• Jones, D. M., Macken, W. J., & Murray, A. C. (1993). Disruption of visual short-term memory by changing-state auditory stimuli: The role of segmentation. Memory & Cognition, 21(3), 318–328. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208264
   Google Scholar
• Jones, D. M., Macken, W. J., & Nicholls, A. P. (2004). The phonological store of working memory: Is it phonological and is it a store?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(3), 656–674. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.3.656
   Google Scholar
• Klatte, M., Kilcher, H., & Hellbrück, J. (1995). Wirkungen der zeitlichen Struktur von Hintergrundschall auf das Arbeitsgedächtnis und ihre theoretischen und praktischen Implikationen [The effects of temporal structure of background noise on working memory: Theoretical and practical implications]. Zeitschrift Fur Experimentelle Psychologie, 42(4), 517–544. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1996-04667-002
   Google Scholar
• Klatte, M., Lachmann, T., Schlittmeier, S., & Hellbrück, J. (2010). The irrelevant sound effect in short-term memory: Is there developmental change? European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 22(8), 1168–1191. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440903378250
   Google Scholar
• Körner, U., Röer, J. P., Buchner, A., & Bell, R. (2017). Working memory capacity is equally unrelated to auditory distraction by changing-state and deviant sounds. Journal of Memory and Language, 96, 122–137. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2017.05.005
   Google Scholar
• Lang, A.-G. (2017). Is intermediately inspecting statistical data necessarily a bad research practice? The Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 13(2), 127–140. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.20982/tqmp.13.2.p127
   Google Scholar
• LeCompte, D. C., Neely, C. B., & Wilson, J. R. (1997). Irrelevant speech and irrelevant tones: The relative importance of speech to the irrelevant speech effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23(2), 472–483. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.23.2.472
   Google Scholar
• Leding, J. K. (2019). Intentional memory and online data collection: A test of the effects of animacy and threat on episodic memory. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 31(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2018.1564756
   Google Scholar
• Lee, M. D., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2013). Bayesian cognitive modeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lefever, S., Dal, M., & Matthíasdóttir, Á. (2007). Online data collection in academic research: Advantages and limitations. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(4), 574–582. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00638.x
   Google Scholar
• Marsh, J. E., Marois, A., Hurlstone, M. J., Ball, L. J., Moore, S. B., Vachon, F., Schlittmeier, S., … Buchner, A. (2022). Changing-state irrelevant speech disrupts visual-verbal but not visual-spatial serial recall: Implications for modularity, functional equivalence, and theories of auditory distraction in short-term memory. Manuscript submitted.
   Google Scholar
• Marsh, J. E., Röer, J. P., Bell, R., & Buchner, A. (2014). Predictability and distraction: Does the neural model represent postcategorical features? PsyCh Journal, 3(1), 58–71. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/pchj.50
   Google Scholar
• Mason, W., & Suri, S. (2012). Conducting behavioral research on Amazon’s mechanical Turk. Behavior Research Methods, 44(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0124-6
   Google Scholar
• Morey, R. D., & Rouder, J. N. (2015). BayesFactor Package (version 0.9.12–2). http://bayesfactorpcl.r-forge.r-project.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Neath, I. (2000). Modeling the effects of irrelevant speech on memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7(3), 403–423. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03214356
   Google Scholar
• Oberauer, K., Lewandowsky, S., Awh, E., Brown, G. D. A., Conway, A., Cowan, N., Donkin, C., … Ward, G. (2018). Benchmarks for models of short-term and working memory. Psychological Bulletin, 144(9), 885–958. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000153
   Google Scholar
• Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), 943. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716
   Google Scholar
• R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from https://checkpoint.urlprotection.com/v1/url?o=http%3A//www.rproject.org/&g=NmQxMjMyNmNiZDVhMGFlNw==&h=NDEzYzRhZGFmZDc2MTY3MzJlMzhkMTY4YjNhMDJkMWQzMjU0OGZiMWMyOTJlM2ZhZjA3OWI2ODVlNDczNzMzMg==&p=Y3AxZTp1Y2xhbmxpdmU6Y2hlY2twb2ludDpvZmZpY2UzNjVfZW1haWxzX2VtYWlsOjZlNDhhNTQxNzExOTFlYzQzMDU5NmFkOGRiYzE1YjE5On
   Google Scholar
• Reips, U.-D. (2008). How internet-mediated research changes science. In A. Barak (Ed.), Psychological aspects of cyberspace: Theory, research, applications (pp. 268–294). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rouder, J. N. (2014). Optional stopping: No problem for bayesians. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21(2), 301–308. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0595-4
   Google Scholar
• Salamé, P., & Baddeley, A. D. (1982). Disruption of short-term memory by unattended speech: Implications for the structure of working memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21(2), 150–164. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(82)90521-7
   Google Scholar
• Schlittmeier, S. J., & Hellbrück, J. (2009). Background music as noise abatement in open-plan offices: A laboratory study on performance effects and subjective preferences. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 23(5), 684–697. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1498
   Google Scholar
• Schlittmeier, S. J., Hellbrück, J., & Klatte, M. (2008). Does irrelevant music cause an irrelevant sound effect for auditory items? European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 20(2), 252–271. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440701427838
   Google Scholar
• Schlittmeier, S. J., Weißgerber, T., Kerber, S., Fastl, H., & Hellbrück, J. (2012). Algorithmic modeling of the irrelevant sound effect (ISE) by the hearing sensation fluctuation strength. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74(1), 194–203. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-011-0230-7
   Google Scholar
• Schönbrodt, F. D., &Stefan, A. M. (2019). BFDA: An R package for Bayes factor design analysis (version 0.5.0). Retrieved from https://checkpoint.url-protection.com/v1/url?o=https%3A//github.com/nicebread/BFDA&g=MTBkNzg0ZTVhZjA0YjIzNA==&h=NTQ1ZGY4OTYzY2Q0MzU2YmM5MWFkZThkOTcwNmRiZjg0MDg2Y2E5ZWQ3NjYxYjA5NmFlNTBlZGNjNThjZmZiNQ==&p=Y3AxZTp1Y2xhbmxpdmU6Y2hlY2tw
   Google Scholar
• Schönbrodt, F. D., & Wagenmakers, E. (2018). Bayes factor design analysis: Planning for compelling evidence. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(1), 128–142. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1230-y
   Google Scholar
• Schönbrodt, F. D., Wagenmakers, E., Zehetleitner, M., & Perugini, M. (2017). Sequential hypothesis testing with Bayes factors: Efficiently testing mean differences. Psychological Methods, 22(2), 322–339. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000061
   Google Scholar
• Schweppe, J., & Knigge, J. (2020). Irrelevant music: How suprasegmental changes of a melody’s tempo and mode affect the disruptive potential of music on serial recall. Memory & Cognition, 48(6), 982–993. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-020-01037-1
   Google Scholar
• Sörqvist, P. (2010). High working memory capacity attenuates the deviation effect but not the changing-state effect: Further support for the duplex-mechanism account of auditory distraction. Memory & Cognition, 38(5), 651–658. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.38.5.651
   Google Scholar
• Tremblay, S., Nicholls, A. P., Alford, D., & Jones, D. M. (2000). The irrelevant sound effect: Does speech play a special role. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(6), 1750–1754. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.26.6.1750
   Google Scholar
• van Doorn, J., van den Bergh, D., Bohm, U., Dablander, F., Derks, K., Draws, T., Etz, A., Evans, N. J., … Wagenmakers, E. (2019, January 23). The JASP guidelines for conducting and reporting a Bayesian analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 28(3), 813–826. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-020-01798-5
   Google Scholar
• Wagenmakers, E.-J., Love, J., Marsman, M., Jamil, T., Ly, A., Verhagen, J., Selker, R., … Morey, R. D. (2018). Bayesian inference for psychology. Part II: Example applications with JASP. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(1), 58–76. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1323-7
   Google Scholar
• Woods, K. J. P., Siegel, M., Traer, J., & McDermott, J. H. (2017). Headphone screening to facilitate web-based auditory experiments. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 79(7), 2064–2072. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-017-1361-2
   Google Scholar