Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Changing-State Irrelevant Speech Disrupts Visua...

Electronic data

  • Marsh.et.al.24.JEP

    Accepted author manuscript, 696 KB, PDF document

    Embargo ends: 1/01/40

    Available under license: CC BY: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

View graph of relations

Changing-State Irrelevant Speech Disrupts Visual-Verbal but not Visual-Spatial Serial Recall

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Forthcoming

Standard

Changing-State Irrelevant Speech Disrupts Visual-Verbal but not Visual-Spatial Serial Recall. / Marsh, John; Hurlstone, Mark; Marois, Alexandre et al.
In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 08.03.2024.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Marsh, J, Hurlstone, M, Marois, A, Ball, L, Moore, S, Vachon, F, Schlittmeier, S, Roer, J, Buchner, A, Aust, F & Bell, R 2024, 'Changing-State Irrelevant Speech Disrupts Visual-Verbal but not Visual-Spatial Serial Recall', Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition.

APA

Marsh, J., Hurlstone, M., Marois, A., Ball, L., Moore, S., Vachon, F., Schlittmeier, S., Roer, J., Buchner, A., Aust, F., & Bell, R. (in press). Changing-State Irrelevant Speech Disrupts Visual-Verbal but not Visual-Spatial Serial Recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition.

Vancouver

Marsh J, Hurlstone M, Marois A, Ball L, Moore S, Vachon F et al. Changing-State Irrelevant Speech Disrupts Visual-Verbal but not Visual-Spatial Serial Recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2024 Mar 8.

Author

Marsh, John ; Hurlstone, Mark ; Marois, Alexandre et al. / Changing-State Irrelevant Speech Disrupts Visual-Verbal but not Visual-Spatial Serial Recall. In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2024.

Bibtex

@article{b491ea01c6234f349cdccf0b1368b064,
title = "Changing-State Irrelevant Speech Disrupts Visual-Verbal but not Visual-Spatial Serial Recall",
abstract = "In an influential paper, 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-{\`a}-vis the robustness of this result is sorely lacking. Here, two high-powered replications of Jones et al.{\textquoteright}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.",
author = "John Marsh and Mark Hurlstone and Alexandre Marois and Linden Ball and Stuart Moore and Francois Vachon and Sabine Schlittmeier and Jan Roer and Axel Buchner and Frederick Aust and Raoul Bell",
year = "2024",
month = mar,
day = "8",
language = "English",
journal = "Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition",
issn = "0278-7393",
publisher = "AMER PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Changing-State Irrelevant Speech Disrupts Visual-Verbal but not Visual-Spatial Serial Recall

AU - Marsh, John

AU - Hurlstone, Mark

AU - Marois, Alexandre

AU - Ball, Linden

AU - Moore, Stuart

AU - Vachon, Francois

AU - Schlittmeier, Sabine

AU - Roer, Jan

AU - Buchner, Axel

AU - Aust, Frederick

AU - Bell, Raoul

PY - 2024/3/8

Y1 - 2024/3/8

N2 - In an influential paper, 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.

AB - In an influential paper, 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.

M3 - Journal article

JO - Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition

JF - Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition

SN - 0278-7393

ER -