| Title: |
Changing-State Irrelevant Speech Disrupts Visual-Verbal but Not Visual-Spatial Serial Recall |
| Language: |
English |
| Authors: |
John E. Marsh (ORCID 0000-0002-9494-1287); Mark J. Hurlstone; Alexandre Marois; Linden J. Ball (ORCID 0000-0002-5099-0124); Stuart B. Moore; François Vachon; Sabine J. Schlittmeier; Jan Philipp Röer; Axel Buchner; Frederik Aust; Raoul Bell |
| Source: |
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2024 50(11):1772-1790. |
| Availability: |
American Psychological Association. Journals Department, 750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002. Tel: 800-374-2721; Tel: 202-336-5510; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: order@apa.org; Web site: http://www.apa.org |
| Peer Reviewed: |
Y |
| Page Count: |
19 |
| Publication Date: |
2024 |
| Document Type: |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research |
| Descriptors: |
Recall (Psychology); Spatial Ability; Memory; Speech; Attention Control; Auditory Stimuli; Retention (Psychology); Foreign Countries; Visual Stimuli; Verbal Stimuli |
| Geographic Terms: |
United Kingdom |
| DOI: |
10.1037/xlm0001360 |
| ISSN: |
0278-7393; 1939-1285 |
| Abstract: |
In an influential article, Jones et al. (1995) provide evidence that auditory distraction by changing relative to repetitive auditory distracters (the changing-state effect) did not differ between a visual-verbal and visual-spatial serial recall task, providing evidence for an amodal mechanism for the representation of serial order in short-term memory that transcends modalities. This finding has been highly influential for theories of short-term memory and auditory distraction. However, evidence vis-à-vis the robustness of this result is sorely lacking. Here, two high-powered replications of Jones et al.'s (1995) crucial Experiment 4 were undertaken. In the first partial replication (n = 64), a fully within-participants design was adopted, wherein participants undertook both the visual-verbal and visual-spatial serial recall tasks under different irrelevant sound conditions, without a retention period. The second near-identical replication (n = 128), incorporated a retention period and implemented the task-modality manipulation as a between-participants factor, as per the original Jones et al. (1995; Experiment 4) study. In both experiments, the changing-state effect was observed for visual-verbal serial recall but not for visual-spatial serial recall. The results are consistent with modular and interference-based accounts of distraction and challenge some aspects of functional equivalence accounts. |
| Abstractor: |
As Provided |
| Entry Date: |
2026 |
| Accession Number: |
EJ1507951 |
| Database: |
ERIC |