The effect of multisensory distraction on working memory: A role for task relevance?

IF 2.2 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY
Nora Turoman, Evie Vergauwe
{"title":"The effect of multisensory distraction on working memory: A role for task relevance?","authors":"Nora Turoman, Evie Vergauwe","doi":"10.1037/xlm0001323","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There is growing recognition that working memory and selective attention are highly related. However, a key function of selective attention-ignoring distractors-is much less understood in the domain of working memory. In the attention domain, it is now clear that distractors' task relevance and stimulation of multiple senses at a time (i.e., being multisensory), affect how much such information can distract from the main task, and that load modulates these effects. Here, we examined the effects of the task relevance and multisensory nature of distractors on working memory performance under high and low memory load, aiming to clarify whether distracting information similarly affects selective attention performance and working memory performance. We proposed a multiexperiment research plan involving up to three consecutive experiments, based on an initial online study (Experiment 0) with fully task-irrelevant distractors. There, we found conclusive evidence against a difference in how unisensory and multisensory distractors affected working memory performance. The next study, Experiment 1, replicated these results. However, when distractors were made partly task relevant in the subsequent Experiment 2d, multisensory distractors disrupted working memory performance more than unisensory distractors on average. However, closer nonpreregistered inspection revealed that multisensory distractors were actually only more disruptive than auditory distractors, and similarly as disruptive as visual distractors. Thus, overall, there was no strong evidence for multisensory distractors being more disruptive to working memory performance than unisensory distractors. Taken together, these experiments constitute a novel and detailed investigation of the impact of distracting information on working memory performance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":50194,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001323","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There is growing recognition that working memory and selective attention are highly related. However, a key function of selective attention-ignoring distractors-is much less understood in the domain of working memory. In the attention domain, it is now clear that distractors' task relevance and stimulation of multiple senses at a time (i.e., being multisensory), affect how much such information can distract from the main task, and that load modulates these effects. Here, we examined the effects of the task relevance and multisensory nature of distractors on working memory performance under high and low memory load, aiming to clarify whether distracting information similarly affects selective attention performance and working memory performance. We proposed a multiexperiment research plan involving up to three consecutive experiments, based on an initial online study (Experiment 0) with fully task-irrelevant distractors. There, we found conclusive evidence against a difference in how unisensory and multisensory distractors affected working memory performance. The next study, Experiment 1, replicated these results. However, when distractors were made partly task relevant in the subsequent Experiment 2d, multisensory distractors disrupted working memory performance more than unisensory distractors on average. However, closer nonpreregistered inspection revealed that multisensory distractors were actually only more disruptive than auditory distractors, and similarly as disruptive as visual distractors. Thus, overall, there was no strong evidence for multisensory distractors being more disruptive to working memory performance than unisensory distractors. Taken together, these experiments constitute a novel and detailed investigation of the impact of distracting information on working memory performance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

多感官分心对工作记忆的影响:任务相关性的作用?
越来越多的人认识到,工作记忆和选择性注意高度相关。然而,在工作记忆领域,人们对选择性注意的一个关键功能--忽略分心物--的理解要少得多。在注意力领域,目前已经明确的是,分心物的任务相关性和对多种感官的刺激(即多感官刺激)会影响这些信息对主要任务的分心程度,而负荷会调节这些影响。在此,我们研究了在高和低记忆负荷下,任务相关性和分心信息的多感官性质对工作记忆能力的影响,旨在弄清分心信息是否同样会影响选择性注意能力和工作记忆能力。我们提出了一个多实验研究计划,包括多达三个连续实验,以完全与任务无关的分心物为基础的初始在线研究(实验 0)为基础。在该实验中,我们发现了确凿的证据,证明单感官和多感官分心物对工作记忆能力的影响存在差异。接下来的实验 1 重复了这些结果。然而,在随后的实验 2d 中,当分散注意力的因素部分与任务相关时,多感官分散注意力因素对工作记忆能力的干扰平均要大于单感官分散注意力因素。然而,仔细观察后发现,多感官干扰实际上只比听觉干扰更具干扰性,与视觉干扰的干扰性相似。因此,总体而言,没有强有力的证据表明多感官干扰比单感官干扰对工作记忆的干扰更大。总之,这些实验是对分心信息对工作记忆能力的影响进行的一次新颖而详细的调查。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, 版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
3.80%
发文量
163
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition publishes studies on perception, control of action, perceptual aspects of language processing, and related cognitive processes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信