Investigating the Disturbance Impact of Background Speech on Verbal and Visual-Spatial Short-Term Memory: On the Differential Contributions of Changing-State and Phonology to the Irrelevant Sound Effect

References

• Baddeley, A. (1986). Working memory. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baddeley, A. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(11), 417–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01538-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beaman, C. P. (2004). The irrelevant sound effect revisited: What role for working memory capacity? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(5), 1106–1118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.5.1106
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bell, R., Röer, J. P., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2019). Reassessing the token set size effect on serial recall: Implications for theories of auditory distraction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 45(8), 1432–1440 doi:10.1037/xlm0000658.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergström, K., Lachmann, T., & Klatte, M. (2012). Wann stört Lärm das geistige Arbeiten? Einfluss von Aufgaben- und Geräuschcharakteristiken bei der Wirkung moderaten Lärms auf Arbeitsgedächtnisleistungen [proceeding]. Jahrestagung für Akustik (DAGA), Vol. 38, Darmstadt, Germany: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Akustik. https://pub.dega-akustik.de/DAGA_2012/data/articles/000316.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Boersma, P., & Weenink, K. (2005). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. (https://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/praat)
   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, 10(3), 199–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210143000335
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colle, H. A., & Welsh, A. (1976). Acoustic masking in primary memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15(1), 17–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(76)90003-7
   Google Scholar
• Conway, A. R., Kane, M. J., Bunting, M. F., Hambrick, D. Z., Wilhelm, O., & Negle, R. W. (2005). Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user’s guide. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(5), 769–786. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196772
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cowan, N. (1995). Oxford psychology series, No. 26. Attention and memory: An integrated framework. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dietrich, P., Guski, M., Pollow, M., Müller-Trapet, M., Masiero, B., Scharrer, R., & Vorländer, M. (2012). ITA-Toolbox – An open source MATLAB toolbox for acousticians [proceeding]. Jahrestagung für Akustik (DAGA), Vol. 38, Darmstadt, Germany: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Akustik. https://pub.dega-akustik.de/DAGA_2012/data/index.html
   Google Scholar
• DIN 45631. (1991). Berechnung des Lautstärkepegels und der Lautheit aus dem Geräuschspektrum – Verfahren nach E. Zwicker (Berlin: Beuth).
   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/10.1177/1747021817739257
   Web of Science ®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 & Performance, 24(5), 1406–1414 doi:10.1037//0096-1523.24.5.1406.
   PubMed Web of Science ®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(2), 145–157. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-019-00968-8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Engle, R. (2002). Working memory capacity as executive attention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(1), 19–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00160
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes, R. W., Hurlstone, M. J., Marsh, J. E., Vachon, F., & Jones, D. M. (2013). Cognitive control auf 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/10.1037/a0029064
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes, R. W., Tremblay, S., & Jones, D. M. (2005). Disruption by speech of serial short-term memory: The role of changing-state vowels. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 12(5), 886–890. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196781
   PubMed Web of Science ®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(4), 736–749. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.31.4.736
   PubMed Web of Science ®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/10.1037/0278-7393.33.6.1050
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, D. M. (1993). Objects, streams and threads of auditory attention. In A. D. Baddeley & L. Weiskrantz (Eds.), Attention, awareness, and control. Oxford University Press, 87–104.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, D. M., Alford, D., Macken, W. J., Banbury, S., & Tremblay, S. (2000). Interference from degraded auditory stimuli: Linear effects of changing-state in the irrelevant sequence. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 108(3), 1082–1088. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1288412
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, D. M., Beaman, P., & Macken, W. J. (1996). The object-oriented episodic record model. In S. E. Gathercole (Ed.), Models of short-term memory (pp. 209–238). Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, D. M., 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/10.1037//0278-7393.21.4.1008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, D. M., Hughes, R. W., & Macken, W. J. (2010). Auditory distraction and serial memory: The avoidable and the ineluctable. Noise & Health, 12(49), 201–209. https://doi.org/10.4103/1463-1741.70497
   PubMed Web of Science ®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 doi:10.1037/0278-7393.19.2.369.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, D. M., & Macken, W. J. (1995). Phonological similarity in the irrelevant speech effect: Within- or between-stream similarity? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(1), 103–115 doi:10.1037/0278-7393.21.1.103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, D. M., Madden, C., & Miles, C. (1992). Privileged access by irrelevant speech to short-term memory: The role of changing state. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 44(4), 645–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640749208401304
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, D. M., Miles, C., & Page, J. (1990). Disruption of proof-reading by irrelevant speech: Effects of attention, arousal or memory? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 4(2), 89–108. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2350040203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klatte, M., Lachmann, T., Schlittmeier, S. J., & 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/10.1080/09541440903378250
   Web of Science ®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(1), 122–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2017.05.005
   Google Scholar
• Kvetnaya, T. (2018). Registered replication report: Testing disruptive effects of irrelevant speech on visual-spatial working memory. Journal of European Psychology Students, 9(1), 10–15. https://doi.org/10.5334/jeps.450
   Google Scholar
• Larsen, J. D., Baddeley, A., & Andrade, J. (2000). Phonological similarity and the irrelevant speech effect: Implications for models of short-term verbal memory. Memory, 8(3), 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/096582100387579
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeCompte, D. C. (1995). An irrelevant speech effect with repeated and continuous background speech. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2(3), 391–397. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210978
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeCompte, D. C., & Shaibe, D. M. (1997). On the irrelevance of phonological similarity to the irrelevant speech effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 50(1), 100–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/027249897392242
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leist, L., Lachmann, T., Schlittmeier, S. J., Georgi, M., & Klatte, M. (accepted for publication). Effects of irrelevant speech on serial recall of verbal and spatial materials in children and adults, Memory & Cognition.
   Google Scholar
• Macken, W., Tremblay, S., Alford, D., & Jones, D. M. (1999). Attentional selectivity in short-term memory: Similarity of process, not similarity of content, determines disruption. International Journal of Psychology, 34(5/6), 322–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/002075999399639
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macken, W. J., Tremblay, S., Houghton, R. H., Nicholls, A. P., & Jones, D. M. (2003). Does auditory streaming require attention? Evidence from attentional selectivity in short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29(1), 43–51. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.29.1.43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marsh, J. E., Hughes, R. W., & Jones, D. M. (2009). Interference by process, not content, determines semantic auditory distraction. Cognition, 110(1), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.08.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marsh, J. E., Hurlstone, M. J., Marois, A., Ball, L. J., Moore, S. B., Vachon, F., Schlittmeier, S. J., Röer, J. P., Buchner, A., & Bell, R. (revision under review). Changing-state irrelevant speech disrupts visual-verbal but not visual-spatial serial recall, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Leaning, Memory and Cognition.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, R. C., Wogalter, M. S., & Forlano, J. G. (1988). Reading comprehension in the presence of unattended speech and music. Journal of Memory and Language, 27(4), 382–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(88)90063-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MATLAB. (1984). MATLAB. The MathWorks Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Neely, C. B., & LeCompte, D. C. (1999). The importance of semantic similarity to the irrelevant speech effect. Memory & Cognition, 27(1), 37–44. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03201211
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norris, D., Baddeley, A. D., & Page, M. P. A. (2004). Retroactive effects of irrelevant speech on serial recall from short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(5), 1093–1105. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.5.1093
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Page, M. P. A., & Norris, D. G. (1998). Modeling immediate serial recall with a localist implementation of the primacy model. In J. Grainger & A. M. Jacobs (Eds.), Localist connectionist approaches to human cognition (pp. 227–255). Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Page, M. P. A., & Norris, D. G. (2003). The irrelevant sound effect: What needs modelling, and a tentative model. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56(8), 1289–1300. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980343000233
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parmentier, F. B. R., Elford, G., & Maybery, M. (2005). Transitional information in spatial serial memory: Path characteristics affect recall performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(3), 412–427. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.31.3.412
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peirce, J. W. (2007). PsychoPy – psychophysics software in python. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 162(1–2), 8–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2006.11.017
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson, G. E. (1952). The information-bearing elements of speech. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 24(6), 629–637. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1906945
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson, G. E., & Barney, H. L. (1952). Control methods used in a study of the vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 24(2), 175–184. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1906875
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Remez, R. E., & Rubin, P. E. (1990). On the perception of speech from time-varying acoustic information: Contributions of amplitude variation. Perception & Psychophysics, 48(4), 313–325. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206682
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Remez, R. E., Rubin, P. E., Pisoni, D. B., & Carell, T. D. (1981). Speech perception without traditional speech cues. Science, 212(4497), 947–949. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7233191
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Röer, J. P., Bell, R., & Buchner, A. (2015). Specific foreknowledge reduces auditory distraction by irrelevant speech. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 41(3), 692–702 doi:10.1037/xhp0000028.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosen, S., & Hui, S. N. (2015). Sine-wave and noise-vocoded sine-wave speech in a tone language: Acoustic details matter. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 138(6), 3698–3702. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4937605
   PubMed Web of Science ®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/10.1016/S0022-5371(82)90521-7
   Google Scholar
• Salamé, P., & Baddeley, A. D. (1987). Noise, unattended speech and short-term memory. Ergonomics, 30(8), 1185–1193. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140138708966007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salamé, P., & Baddeley, A. (1989). Effects of background music on phonological short-term memory. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41(1), 107–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640748908402355
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlittmeier, S. J., Hellbrück, J., & Klatte, M. (2008). Can the irrelevant speech effect turn into a stimulus suffix effect? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61(5), 665–673. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210701774168
   Web of Science ®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, and Psychophysics, 74(1), 194–203. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-011-0230-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slawson, A. W. (1968). Vowel quality and musical timbre as functions of spectrum envelope and fundamental frequency. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 43(1), 87–101. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1910769
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sörqvist, P. (2010a). 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/10.3758/MC.38.5.651
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sörqvist, P. (2010b). The role of working memory capacity in auditory distraction: A review. Noise & Health, 12(49), 217–224. https://doi.org/10.4103/1463-1741.70500
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sörqvist, P., Marsh, J. E., & Nöstl, A. (2013). High working memory capacity does not always attenuate distraction: Bayesian evidence in support of the null hypothesis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20(5), 897–904. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0419-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sörqvist, P., Nöstl, A., & Halin, N. (2012). Disruption of writing processes by the semanticity of background speech. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 53(2), 97–102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2011.00936.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sternberg, S. (1969). Memory-scanning: Mental processes revealed by reaction-time experiments. American Scientist, 57(4), 421–457. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27828738
   PubMed Web of Science ®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/10.1037//0278-7393.26.6.1750
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner, M. L., & Engle, R. W. (1989). Is working memory capacity task dependent? Journal of Memory & Language, 28(2), 127–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(89)90040-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ueda, K., Nakajima, Y., Kattner, F., & Ellermeier, W. (2019). Irrelevant speech effects with locally time-reversed speech: Native vs non-native language. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 145(6), 3686–3694. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.5112774
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Unsworth, N., Heitz, R. P., Schrock, J. C., & Engle, R. W. (2005). An automated version of the operation span task. Behavior Research Methods, 37(3), 498–505. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192720
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viswanathan, N., Dorsi, J., & George, S. (2014). The role of speech-specific properties of the background in the irrelevant sound effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(3), 581–589. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2013.821708
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar