Phonological similarity and the irrelevant speech effect: implications for models of short-term verbal memory

Three experiments studied the interaction between irrelevant speech and phonological similarity within both the remembered and the irrelevant auditory material. Phonological similarity within the remembered list impaired performance in both baseline and irrelevant speech conditions, whereas phonological similarity between the remembered and ignored irrelevant items did not influence performance. Although there was a tendency for similarity within the irrelevant items to reduce interference, this proved to be a less robust finding. Implications for the theoretical interpretation of the irrelevant speech effect are discussed.     

Irrelevant speech,articulatory suppression,and phonological similarity: A test of the phonological loop model and the feature model

Two experiments tested competing predictions about the nature of the irrelevant speech effect that were derived from Neath's (2000) feature model and from Salamé and Baddeley's (1982) phonological loop model. The first experiment examined the combined effects of irrelevant speech and articulatory suppression when target items were presented auditorily. Contrary to the suggestions of Neath, but consistent with the phonological loop model, the effects of articulatory suppression and irrelevant speech were additive even when the irrelevant speech was presented during the retention interval The second experiment examined the combined effects of irrelevant speech and phonological similarity when target items were presented visually. Consistent with the phonological loop model, the effects of phonological similarity and irrelevant speech were additive when participants were specifically instructed to use articulatory/phonological rehearsal to remember the list items. The results therefore contradicted Neath's claim that irrelevant speech abolishes the phonological similarity effect when list items are presented visually. However, the effect of phonological similarity was abolished in the irrelevant speech conditions when no instructions were given concerning rehearsal. It is argued that the phonological similarity effect disappears in some experiments because participants sometimes employ a semantic rehearsal strategy, consistent with the views of Salamé and Baddeley (1986).     

Irrelevant speech effects and statistical learning

Immediate serial recall of visually presented verbal stimuli is impaired by the presence of irrelevant auditory background speech, the so-called irrelevant speech effect. Two of the three main accounts of this effect place restrictions on when it will be observed, limiting its occurrence either to items processed by the phonological loop (the phonological loop hypothesis) or to items that are not too dissimilar from the irrelevant speech (the feature model). A third, the object-oriented episodic record (O-OER) model, requires only that the memory task involves seriation. The present studies test these three accounts by examining whether irrelevant auditory speech will interfere with a task that does not involve the phonological loop, does not use stimuli that are compatible with those to be remembered, but does require seriation. Two experiments found that irrelevant speech led to lower levels of performance in a visual statistical learning task, offering more support for the O-OER model and posing a challenge for the other two accounts.     

Irrelevant Speech,Phonological Similarity,and Presentation Modality

The phonological similarity effect refers to the finding that a list of similarsounding items is recalled less well than a list of dissimilar-sounding items. A strong prediction of the phonological store hypothesis, based on Baddeley's (1986, 1992) working memory framework, is that irrelevant speech should interact with the phonological similarity effect. We report three experiments that demonstrate that irrelevant speech eliminates the phonological similarity effect for visual but not for auditory items. In this respect, irrelevant speech functions much like articulatory suppression. Implications for the phonological store and changing state hypotheses are discussed.     

On the Irrelevance of Phonological Similarity to the Irrelevant Speech Effect

Irrelevant background speech disrupts immediate recall of visually presented items. Salame and Baddeley (1982) found that increasing the phonological similarity between the irrelevant speech and the visual items greatly increased this disruption. In contrast, Jones and Macken (1995) found little evidence for such an increase. The present experiments directly manipulated the phonological similarity of the irrelevant speech background and the to-be-remembered visual items. Experiments 1-4 compared background speech that shared virtually no phonemes with the visual stimuli with background speech that shared all of the phonemes of the visual stimuli. No effectof phonological similarity was found.Experiment5 replicatedthe method of Salame and Baddeley's critical experimentbut nottheir results. With regard to the two primary explanations ofthe irrelevant speech effect, these data present a strong challenge to the phonological store hypothesis while offering some support to the changing state hypothesis.     

Modeling the effects of irrelevant speech on memory

The feature model (Nairne, 1990) is extended to account for the effects of irrelevant speech and concomitant interactions in immediate serial recall. In the feature model, both articulatory suppression and irrelevant speech are seen as adding noise to the memory representation, the difference being that articulatory suppression diverts more resources than does irrelevant speech. The addition of noise impairs recall because it reduces the probability of successful redintegration. When a competitor is incorrectly recalled, rather than the correct item, this competitor is recalled out of order, producing an increase in order errors. Six simulations are reported that show that the model accounts for (1) the impairment by both irrelevant speech and articulatory suppression, (2) the irrelevance of the phonological and semantic composition of the irrelevant speech, (3) greater disruption when the irrelevant speech tokens vary, (4) the abolition of the phonological similarity effect for visual, but not for auditory, items, (5) the abolition of the word length effect for both visual and auditory items, and (6) the abolition of the irrelevant speech effect under articulatory suppression for both visual and auditory items. The feature model is compared with the two other major views of irrelevant speech, the phonological store hypothesis and the changing state hypothesis.     

The phonological loop model of working memory: An ERP study of irrelevant speech and phonological similarity effects

The phonological loop model for retention of auditory verbal material in working memory, developed by Baddeley, assumes that irrelevant speech and phonological similarity influence only one and the same element of the system—that is, the phonological short-term store. We tested this idea by recording eventrelated potentials (ERPs) to auditorily presented letters that were phonologically similar or dissimilar and were to be memorized in the presence of more or less disturbing irrelevant speech. Irrelevant speech and phonological similarity caused ERP effects with clearly different scalp topographies, indicating that these factors influence different brain systems and hence probably different cognitive elements. Moreover, ERPs indicated that the phonological similarity effect might involve processes at the level of phonological analysis. Our data also support recent suggestions that the irrelevant speech effect is not based on the phonological similarity between relevant and irrelevant material, but on the phonological variability within the irrelevant stream.     

Overlap of phonetic features as a determinant of the between-stream phonological similarity effect

Serial recall from working memory is known to be impaired by the presence of irrelevant background speech, but several prior studies have concluded that the magnitude of the impairment is independent of the phonological relationship between to-be-remembered (TBR) and to-be-ignored (TBI) sources of information. In the present study, we examined the influence of between-stream phonological similarity in serial recall while attending to a heretofore uncontrolled variable, the phonetic feature. We found that TBI items sharing many phonetic features with TBR items produced significantly stronger working-memory impairments than TBI items with minimal phonetic feature overlap. In addition, participants were more likely to report remembering incorrect items that incorporated phonological characteristics of the TBI stream in the high-overlap condition. These findings provide evidence for subphonemic between-stream interactions and suggest that multiple parallel processes contribute to the irrelevant speech effect. We propose that a 2-component model, which combines the assumptions of process- and content-based accounts for the irrelevant speech effect, offers the best explanation for these findings.     

Disruption of verbal STM by irrelevant speech, articulatory suppression, and manual tapping: Do they have a common source?

Under appropriate conditions, immediate serial verbal recall is impaired by irrelevant speech, articulatory suppression, and syncopated tapping. Interpretation of these variables in terms of the phonological loop component of working memory assumes separate phonological storage and articulatory rehearsal processes. In contrast, the Object-Oriented Episodic Record (O-OER) of Jones and the feature theory of Neath interpret these and other phenomena in terms of a unitary multimodal system. Three experiments investigate these disrupting tasks, with each experiment emphasizing one parameter. In each case, recall of phonologically similar and dissimilar letter sequences is compared as a marker of the presence or absence of phonological coding. In Experiment 1, subjects heard or articulated a single item, or tapped a single key at equal intervals. Only articulatory suppression impaired performance; it also abolished the effects of phonological similarity. Experiment 2 was identical, except that items were heard, or generated in a syncopated rhythm. Both suppression and tapping impaired performance to an equivalent extent and obliterated the effect of phonological similarity. Syncopated irrelevant speech caused a modest but significant impairment in performance. Experiment 3 was identical to Experiment 1, except that six tokens were used. Irrelevant speech and tapping had a clear impact on recall, but neither removed the phonological similarity effect. Again articulatory suppression had a major impact on performance and removed the effect of phonological similarity. We conclude that the pattern of results readily fits the phonological loop hypothesis, provided one accepts Saito's proposal that generating syncopated sequences uses common processes with speech production. It is not clear how the results can be explained by either the O-OER or the feature hypothesis.     

Can the irrelevant speech effect turn into a stimulus suffix effect?

The irrelevant sound effect (ISE) and the stimulus suffix effect (SSE) are two qualitatively different phenomena, although in both paradigms irrelevant auditory material is played while a verbal serial recall task is being performed. Jones, Macken, and Nicholls (2004) have proposed the effect of irrelevant speech on auditory serial recall to switch from an ISE to an SSE mechanism, if the auditory-perceptive similarity of relevant and irrelevant material is maximized. The experiment reported here (n = 36) tested this hypothesis by exploring auditory serial recall performance both under irrelevant speech and under speech suffix conditions. These speech materials were spoken either by the same voice as the auditory items to be recalled or by a different voice. The experimental conditions were such that the likelihood of obtaining an SSE was maximized. The results, however, show that irrelevant speech—in contrast to speech suffixes—affects auditory serial recall independently of its perceptive similarity to the items to be recalled and thus in terms of an ISE mechanism that crucially extends to recency. The ISE thus cannot turn into an SSE.     

Irrelevant speech eliminates the word length effect

Theword length effect refers to the observation that memory is better for short than for long words. Theirrelevant speech effect refers to the finding that memory is better when items are presented against a quiet background than against one with irrelevant speech. According to Baddeley’s (1986, 1994) working memory, these variables should not interact: The word length effect arises from rehearsal by the articulatory control process, whereas irrelevant speech reduces recall through interference in the phonological store. Four experiments demonstrate that, like articulatory suppression, irrelevant speech eliminates the word length effect for both visual and auditory items. These results (1) provide further evidence against the ability of working memory to explain the word length and irrelevant speech effects and (2) confirm a specific prediction of Nairne’s (1990) feature model.     

When does between-sequence phonological similarity promote irrelevant sound disruption?

Typically, the phonological similarity between to-be-recalled items and TBI auditory stimuli has no impact if recall in serial order is required. However, in the present study, the authors have shown that the free recall, but not serial recall, of lists of phonologically related to-be-remembered items was disrupted by an irrelevant sound stream (end rhymes) sharing similar phonological content. These findings can be explained by the notion that between-sequence phonological similarity effects emerge when category-cueing processes become an important determinant for recall, such as when shared category information can be used as a retrieval aid to cue list items or plausible list candidates. In this case, the presence of categorically similar irrelevant items impairs the retrieval of list items and leads to intrusion error. Implications of these results for theories of auditory distraction are discussed.     

The irrelevant sound effect under articulatory suppression: is it a suffix effect?

An experiment is reported that investigates the relation between the suffix effect and the effect of irrelevant sound on the serial recall of short sequences of spoken material. The main issue was whether there is an effect of irrelevant sound under articulatory suppression in the presence of a spoken suffix. As in Hanley and Bakopoulou (2003), the irrelevant sound comprised speech that was presented during the retention interval. When a spoken suffix appeared at the end of the list, a significant effect of irrelevant sound remained when participants were able to rehearse list items. However, it disappeared under articulatory suppression. The effects of irrelevant sound remained significant under suppression when the suffix was an auditory tone but was confined to the final position of the serial position curve. These results parallel those reported by Jones, Macken, and Nicholls (2004) and Jones, Hughes, and Macken (2006) when they examined the effect of articulatory suppression on the phonological similarity effect. The results are consistent with Jones et al.'s (2006, 2004) view that an acoustic-perceptual representation of the terminal list items is the source of the effects of irrelevant sound and phonological similarity when they occur in the presence of articulatory suppression.     

Directly assessing the relationship between irrelevant speech and articulatory suppression

Larsen and Baddeley (2003) examine whether the disruption caused by articulatory suppression on immediate memory tasks is similar to or different from the disruption caused by irrelevant speech. Based on experiments in which they test whether the phonological similarity effect is present or absent, they conclude that articulatory suppression and irrelevant speech are different. We assessed whether articulatory suppression and irrelevant speech are similar or different by correlating the disruption each causes. A significant correlation obtained, indicating a relation between the two. These apparently different conclusions can be readily resolved by adopting the view that articulatory suppression, irrelevant speech, and many other factors vary in the degree to which they are likely to cause subjects to abandon reliance on phonological/acoustic cues in particular tasks.     

Irrelevant speech does not interfere with serial recall in early blind listeners

Phonological working memory is known be (a) inversely related to the duration of the items to be learned (word-length effect), and (b) impaired by the presence of irrelevant speech-like sounds (irrelevant-speech effect). As it is discussed controversially whether these memory disruptions are subject to attentional control, both effects were studied in sighted participants and in a sample of early blind individuals who are expected to be superior in selectively attending to auditory stimuli. Results show that, while performance depended on word length in both groups, irrelevant speech interfered with recall only in the sighted group, but not in blind participants. This suggests that blind listeners may be able to effectively prevent irrelevant sound from being encoded in the phonological store, presumably due to superior auditory processing. The occurrence of a word-length effect, however, implies that blind and sighted listeners are utilizing the same phonological rehearsal mechanism in order to maintain information in the phonological store.     

Privileged Access by Irrelevant Speech to Short-term Memory: The Role of Changing State

Memory for visually presented items is impaired by speech that is played as an irrelevant background. The paper presents the view that changing state of the auditory material is an important prerequisite for this disruption. Four experiments studied the effects of sounds varying in complexity in an attempt to establish which features of changing state in the auditory signal lead to diminished recall. Simple unvarying or repetitive speech sounds were not sufficient to induce the irrelevant speech effect (Experiment 1): in addition, simple analogues of speech, possessing regular or irregular envelopes and using a range of carriers, failed to imitate the action of speech (Experiment 2). Variability of between-utterance phonology in the irrelevant stream (Experiment 3) emerged as a crucial factor. Moreover, predictability of the syllable sequence did not reduce the degree of disruption (Experiment 4) suggesting that supra-syllabic characteristics of the speech are of little importance. The results broadly support the idea that disruption of short-term memory only occurs when the speech stream changes in state. It is argued that disruption occurs in memory when cues to serial order based on phonological representations of heard material interfere with the phonological codes of visual origin. It is suggested that cues to changing state of the speech input contaminate those associated with items of visual origin, which are already in a phonological store.     

Habituation to irrelevant speech: effects on a visual short-term memory task

The Baddeley and Hitch (1974) formulation of short-term or working memory embodied a phonological store within the articulatory loop component of the model. Later formulations specifically postulated an acoustic filter that endowed only speech-like stimuli with obligatory access to this phonological store. This paper presents evidence that this phonological store may have two filters, one of which is subject to habituation and can therefore attenuate the entry of irrelevant speech, thus undermining the obligatory access assumption of the model. An experiment is reported in which subjects were presented with a habituation period comprising 20 min of irrelevant speech--speech to be ignored by the subject--before a test phase in which a visually presented serial recall task with concurrent irrelevant speech was performed. The effect of irrelevant speech, which impairs performance on the primary task when there is no habituation phase, is reduced markedly in those conditions where the speech used in the habituation phase is the same as that used in the test phase, if the irrelevant speech is in a language different from that presented during the subsequent trials or if the habituator is a hummed version of the irrelevant speech passage. When a nonspeech sound (pink noise) is used in the habituation phase, a large irrelevant speech effect is found in the test phase. Morris, Quayle, and Jones (1989) found that humming did not produce an irrelevant speech effect, which suggests that the first filter is permeable to humming but that the second filter is not.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Selective interference with verbal short-term memory for serial order information: A new paradigm and tests of a timing-signal hypothesis

Many recent computational models of verbal short-term memory postulate a separation between processes supporting memory for the identity of items and processes supporting memory for their serial order. Furthermore, some of these models assume that memory for serial order is supported by a timing signal. We report an attempt to find evidence for such a timing signal by comparing an “item probe” task, requiring memory for items, with a “list probe” task, requiring memory for serial order. Four experiments investigated effects of irrelevant speech, articulatory suppression, temporal grouping, and paced finger tapping on these two tasks. In Experiments 1 and 2, irrelevant speech and articulatory suppression had a greater detrimental effect on the list probe task than on the item probe task. Reaction time data indicated that the list probe task, but not the item probe task, induced serial rehearsal of items. Phonological similarity effects confirmed that both probe tasks induced phonological recoding of visual inputs. Experiment 3 showed that temporal grouping of items during list presentation improved performance on the list probe task more than on the item probe task. In Experiment 4, paced tapping had a greater detrimental effect on the list probe task than on the item probe task. However, there was no differential effect of whether tapping was to a simple or a complex rhythm. Overall, the data illustrate the utility of the item probe/list probe paradigm and provide support for models that assume memory for serial order and memory for items involve separate processes. Results are generally consistent with the timing-signal hypothesis but suggest further factors that need to be explored to distinguish it from other accounts.     

Recall of short word lists presented visually at fast rates: Effects of phonological similarity and word length

Phonological similarity of visually presented list items impairs short-term serial recall. Lists of long words are also recalled less accurately than are lists of short words. These results have been attributed to phonological recoding and rehearsal. If subjects articulate irrelevant words during list presentation, both phonological similarity and word length effects are abolished. Experiments 1 and 2 examined effects of phonological similarity and recall instructions on recall of lists shown at fast rates (from one item per 0.114-0.50 sec), which might not permit phonological encoding and rehearsal. In Experiment 3, recall instructions and word length were manipulated using fast presentation rates. Both phonological similarity and word length effects were observed, and they were not dependent on recall instructions. Experiments 4 and 5 investigated the effects of irrelevant concurrent articulation on lists shown at fast rates. Both phonological similarity and word length effects were removed by concurrent articulation, as they were with slow presentation rates.     

The phonological store of working memory: is it phonological and is it a store?

The phonological store construct of the working memory model is critically evaluated. Three experiments test the prediction that the effect of irrelevant sound and the effect of phonological similarity each survive the action of articulatory suppression but only when presentation of to-be-remembered lists is auditory, not visual. No evidence was found to support the interaction predicted among irrelevant speech, modality, and articulatory suppression. Although evidence for an interaction among modality, phonological similarity, and articulatory suppression was found, its presence could be diminished by a suffix, which is an acoustic, not a phonological factor. Coupled with other evidence--from the irrelevant sound effect and errors in natural speech--the action attributed to the phonological store seems better described in terms of a combination of auditory-perceptual and output planning mechanisms.