Auditory memory and the irrelevant sound effect: Further evidence for changing-state disruption

Four experiments investigate the hypothesis that irrelevant sound interferes with serial recall of auditory items in the same fashion as with visually presented items. In Experiment 1 an acoustically changing sequence of 30 irrelevant utterances was more disruptive than 30 repetitions of the same utterance (the changing-state effect; Jones, Madden, & Miles, 1992) whether the to-be-remembered items were visually or auditorily presented. Experiment 2 showed that two different utterances spoken once (a heterogeneous compound suffix; LeCompte & Watkins, 1995) produced less disruption to serial recall than 15 repetitions of the same sequence. Disruption thus depends on the number of sounds in the irrelevant sequence. In Experiments 3a and 3b the number of different sounds, the "token-set" size (Tremblay & Jones, 1998), in an irrelevant sequence also influenced the magnitude of disruption in both irrelevant sound and compound suffix conditions. The results support the view that the disruption of memory for auditory items, like memory for visually presented items, is dependent on the number of different irrelevant sounds presented and the size of the set from which these sounds are taken. Theoretical implications are discussed.     

Auditory memory and the irrelevant sound effect: Further evidence for changing-state disruption

Four experiments investigate the hypothesis that irrelevant sound interferes with serial recall of auditory items in the same fashion as with visually presented items. In Experiment 1 an acoustically changing sequence of 30 irrelevant utterances was more disruptive than 30 repetitions of the same utterance (the changing-state effect; Jones, Madden, & Miles, 1992) whether the to-be-remembered items were visually or auditorily presented. Experiment 2 showed that two different utterances spoken once (a heterogeneous compound suffix; LeCompte & Watkins, 1995) produced less disruption to serial recall than 15 repetitions of the same sequence. Disruption thus depends on the number of sounds in the irrelevant sequence. In Experiments 3a and 3b the number of different sounds, the "token-set" size (Tremblay & Jones, 1998), in an irrelevant sequence also influenced the magnitude of disruption in both irrelevant sound and compound suffix conditions. The results support the view that the disruption of memory for auditory items, like memory for visually presented items, is dependent on the number of different irrelevant sounds presented and the size of the set from which these sounds are taken. Theoretical implications are discussed.     

An irrelevant speech effect with repeated and continuous background speech

The irrelevant speech effect is the impairment of task performance by the presentation of to-be-ignored speech stimuli. Typically, the irrelevant speech comprises a variety of sounds, but previous research (e.g., Jones, Madden, & Miles, 1992) has suggested that the deleterious effect of background speech is virtually eliminated if the speech comprises repetitions of a sound (e.g., “be, be, be”) or a single continuous sound (e.g., “beeeeeee”). Four experiments are reported that challenge this finding. Experiments 1, 2, and 4 show a substantial impairment in serial recall performance in the presence of a repeated sound, and Experiments 3 and 4 show a similar impairment of serial recall in the presence of a continuous sound. The relevance of these findings to several explanations of the irrelevant speech effect is 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.     

Changing-state disruption of lip-reading by irrelevant sound in perceptual and memory tasks

Three experiments investigated irrelevant sound interference of lip-read lists. In Experiment 1, an acoustically changing sequence of nine irrelevant utterances was more disruptive to spoken immediate identification of lists of nine lip-read digits than nine repetitions of the same utterances (the changing-state effect; Jones, Madden, & Miles, 1992). Experiment 2 replicated this finding when lip-read items were sampled with replacement from the nine digits to form the lip-read lists. In Experiment 3, when the irrelevant sound was confined to the retention interval of a delayed recall task, a changing-state pattern of disruption also occurred. Results confirm a changing-state effect in memory for lip-read items but also point to the possibility that, for lip-reading, changing-state effects may occur at an earlier, perceptual stage.     

Disruption by speech of serial short-term memory: The role of changing-state vowels

Serial short-term memory is markedly impaired by the presence of irrelevant speech so long as the successive tokens within the irrelevant speech are phonologically (or acoustically) dissimilar (Jones & Macken, 1995b). In two experiments in which consonant—vowel—consonant syllables were used as irrelevant speech tokens, we sought to evaluate the relative disruptive potency of changes in the final consonant only (Experiment 1), in the initial consonant, or in the vowel portion (Experiment 2) of each token. The results suggest that the vowel changes are the dominant source of disruption. This dominance may be explained, at least in part, by the role played by vowel sounds in the perceptual organization of speech and, in turn, the particular propensity for vowel changes to yield information about serial order. The results are consistent also with the view that the factors that promote order encoding in sound are also the ones that promote disruption.     

Reverberant auditory environments: the effects of multiple echoes on distraction by ‘irrelevant’ speech

Two experiments examine the effect on an immediate recall test of simulating a reverberant auditory environment in which auditory distracters in the form of speech are played to the participants (the ‘irrelevant sound effect’). An echo‐intensive environment simulated by the addition of reverberation to the speech reduced the extent of ‘changes in state’ in the irrelevant speech stream by smoothing the profile of the waveform. In both experiments, the reverberant auditory environment produced significantly smaller irrelevant sound distraction effects than an echo‐free environment. Results are interpreted in terms of changing‐state hypothesis, which states that acoustic content of irrelevant sound, rather than phonology or semantics, determines the extent of the irrelevant sound effect (ISE). Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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.     

Auditory distraction from low‐intensity noise: a review of the consequences for learning and workplace environments

The ‘irrelevant sound effect’ in short‐term memory is commonly believed to entail a number of direct consequences for cognitive performance in the office and other workplaces (e.g. S. P. Banbury, S. Tremblay, W. J. Macken, & D. M. Jones, 2001 ). It may also help to identify what types of sound are most suitable as auditory warning signals. However, the conclusions drawn are based primarily upon evidence from a single task (serial recall) and a single population (young adults). This evidence is reconsidered from the standpoint of different worker populations confronted with common workplace tasks and auditory environments. Recommendations are put forward for factors to be considered when assessing the impact of auditory distraction in the workplace. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Irrelevant Sound Disrupts Order Information in Free Recall as in Serial Recall

The claim that the sensitivity of free recall to disruption by irrelevant sound is a function of the extent to which rote rehearsal is employed as a mnemonic strategy was investigated in two experiments. The degree of disruption by irrelevant sound in terms of both item and order information was contrasted under serial and free recall instructions. Irrelevant sound was found to disrupt order and item information equally in serial and free recall tasks (Experiment 1). Contrary to previous reports, an effect of irrelevant sound was also demonstrated on free recall of particularly long lists, and the interaction between list length and retention interval in the irrelevant sound effect was examined (Experiment 2). Generally, the results support the view that irrelevant sound disrupts the use of order cues.     

Specificity of auditory implicit and explicit memory: Is perceptual priming for environmental sounds exemplar specific?

Previous research (Stuart & Jones, 1995) has suggested that identification of environmental sounds may be mediated by abstract sound recognition units. This article reports the results of four repetition priming experiments that find evidence to the contrary. Participants attempted to identify environmental sounds from the initial sound stems (Experiments 1 and 2) or when the sounds were embedded in white noise (Experiments 3 and 4). Repetition of an identical exemplar sound led to more priming than did exposure to a different exemplar, provided that the perceptual difference between the two different exemplars was sufficiently large. Such an exemplar specificity effect was independent of the depth of prior encoding. A similar exemplar specificity effect was also found in explicit stem-cued recall (Experiments 1 and 2) and recognition (Experiment 3). Depth of encoding dissociated performance on tests of repetition priming and explicit memory. These results suggest that a significant amount of specific information is remembered, both implicitly and explicitly, to characterize individual exemplars of a sound category.     

Hemispheric asymmetries in auditory distraction

Serial-verbal short-term memory is impaired by irrelevant sound, particularly when the sound changes acoustically (the changing-state effect). In contrast, short-term recall of semantic information is impaired only by the semanticity of irrelevant speech, particularly when it is semantically related to the target memory items (the between-sequence semantic similarity effect). Previous research indicates that the changing-state effect is larger when the sound is presented to the left ear in comparison to the right ear, the left ear disadvantage. In this paper, we report a novel finding whereby the between-sequence semantic similarity effect is larger when the irrelevant speech is presented to the right ear in comparison to the left ear, but this right ear disadvantage is found only when meaning is the basis of recall (Experiments 1 and 3), not when order is the basis of recall (Experiment 2). Our results complement previous research on hemispheric asymmetry effects in cross-modal auditory distraction by demonstrating a role for the left hemisphere in semantic auditory distraction.     

Directly assessing the relationship between irrelevant speech and irrelevant tapping

The acoustic confusion effect is the finding that lists of to-be-remembered items that sound similar to one another are recalled worse than otherwise comparable lists of items that sound different. Previous work has shown that concurrent irrelevant speech and concurrent irrelevant tapping both reduce the size of this effect, suggesting similarities between the two manipulations. The authors assessed the relation between irrelevant speech and irrelevant tapping by correlating the disruption each causes to recall of similar- and dissimilar-sounding items. A significant correlation was obtained, indicating a relation between the two. The results indicate that researchers should be sensitive to changes in the magnitude of the effects rather than focusing exclusively on the presence or absence of particular effects. Implications for the 3 major explanations of the irrelevant speech effect are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved).     

不相关言语对视觉觉察的影响

前人多在记忆层面探讨不相关言语效应(the Irrelevant Speech Effect, ISE), 而本文选择在意识觉察(conscious awareness)阶段观察这一现象。所有实验均采用视觉掩蔽及听觉输入不相关声音的视听交互方式。实验1在安静、纯音及不相关言语3种听觉背景下让被试对简单图片做视觉觉察判断, 结果发现不相关言语干扰了视觉觉察, 而纯音则未产生干扰。实验2在相同的3种听觉背景下要求被试对复杂图片做视觉觉察判断, 结果同实验1。实验3采用事件相关电位技术, 在同样的3种听觉背景下观察被试对简单图片做视觉觉察判断时的脑电变化, 结果发现不相关言语干扰了视觉觉察负波的形成, 验证了行为学研究的结果。本文结果表明不相干言语在视觉意识觉察阶段就对被试的行为产生了干扰。     

A left-ear disadvantage for the presentation of irrelevant sound: manipulations of task requirements and changing state

Three experiments attempted to clarify the effect of altering the spatial presentation of irrelevant auditory information. Previous research using serial recall tasks demonstrated a left-ear disadvantage for the presentation of irrelevant sounds (). Experiments 1 and 2 examined the effects of manipulating the location of irrelevant sound on either a mental arithmetic task () or a missing-item task (; Experiment 4). Experiment 3 altered the amount of change in the irrelevant stream to assess how this affected the level of interference elicited. Two prerequisites appear necessary to produce the left-ear disadvantage; the presence of ordered structural changes in the irrelevant sound and the requirement for serial order processing of the attended information. The existence of a left-ear disadvantage highlights the role of the right hemisphere in the obligatory processing of auditory information.     

The sandwich effect reassessed: Effects of streaming, distraction, and modality

The degree of disruption from interleaving auditory irrelevant items within a sequence of to-be-remembered items--the sandwich effect--was examined in two experiments. Previous demonstrations of the effect have shown that the penalty for interleaving items is small and that changing irrelevant tokens is no more damaging than repeating ones (contrary to the classic changing state effect of irrelevant sound). The results of Experiment 1 suggest that these earlier results were due to the lack of tokens in the irrelevant sequence (in part, the result of using a span method). The results of Experiment 2 also show that the sandwich effect was marked and, further, that it comprised two elements, one due to the partitioning of relevant from irrelevant streams (which may be promoted by similarity of identity within sequence or pitch disparity between sequences), and the other a classic irrelevant sound effect (with effects of changing state). The results are discussed in terms of the role of perceptual organization within and between modalities in short-term memory.     

The irrelevant sound phenomenon revisited: what role for working memory capacity?

High-span individuals (as measured by the operation span [OSPAN] technique) are less likely than low-span individuals to notice their own names in an unattended auditory stream (A. R. A. Conway, N. Cowan, & M. F. Bunting, 2001). The possibility that OSPAN accounts for individual differences in auditory distraction on an immediate recall test was examined. There was no evidence that high-OSPAN participants were more resistant to the disruption caused by irrelevant speech in serial or in free recall. Low-OSPAN participants did, however, make more semantically related intrusion errors from the irrelevant sound stream in a free recall test (Experiment 4). Results suggest that OSPAN mediates semantic components of auditory distraction dissociable from other aspects of the irrelevant sound effect.     

Similarities between the irrelevant sound effect and the suffix effect

Although articulatory suppression abolishes the effect of irrelevant sound (ISE) on serial recall when sequences are presented visually, the effect persists with auditory presentation of list items. Two experiments were designed to test the claim that, when articulation is suppressed, the effect of irrelevant sound on the retention of auditory lists resembles a suffix effect. A suffix is a spoken word that immediately follows the final item in a list. Even though participants are told to ignore it, the suffix impairs serial recall of auditory lists. In Experiment 1, the irrelevant sound consisted of instrumental music. The music generated a significant ISE that was abolished by articulatory suppression. It therefore appears that, when articulation is suppressed, irrelevant sound must contain speech for it to have any effect on recall. This is consistent with what is known about the suffix effect. In Experiment 2, the effect of irrelevant sound under articulatory suppression was greater when the irrelevant sound was spoken by the same voice that presented the list items. This outcome is again consistent with the known characteristics of the suffix effect. It therefore appears that, when rehearsal is suppressed, irrelevant sound disrupts the acoustic-perceptual encoding of auditorily presented list items. There is no evidence that the persistence of the ISE under suppression is a result of interference to the representation of list items in a postcategorical phonological store.     

Interference in memory by process or content? A reply to Neath (2000)

The approach to the irrelevant sound effect by Neath (2000) is discussed in terms of the contrast between content-based and process-based interference. Four themes are highlighted: First, problematic features of the feature model are highlighted; second, results not considered by Neath are presented; third, empirical underpinnings of the feature model not related to the irrelevant-sound effect are questioned; last, the parsimony of the feature model is questioned. The balance of the evidence seems to be in favor of a process-based approach, on the grounds that it provides a comprehensive account of acoustic and taskbased factors within the irrelevant sound effect, for both speech and nonspeech sound.     

Irrelevant sound effects amongst younger and older adults: Objective findings and subjective insights

Two experiments examine the effects of extraneous speech and nonspeech noise on a visual short-term memory task administered to younger and older adults. Experiment 1 confirms an earlier report that playing task-irrelevant speech is no more distracting for older adults than for younger adults (Rouleau & Belleville, 1996), indicating that “irrelevant sound effects” in short-term memory operate in a different manner to recalling targets in the presence of competing speech (Tun, O'Kane, & Wingfield, 2002). Experiment 2 extends this result to nonspeech noise and demonstrates that the result cannot be ascribed to hearing difficulties amongst the older age group, although the data also show that older adults rated the noise as less annoying and uncomfortable than younger adults. Implications for theories of the irrelevant sound effect, and for cognitive ageing, are discussed.