From dichotic listening to the irrelevant sound effect: A behavioural and neuroimaging analysis of the processing of unattended speech

Cortex

Volumn 43, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 124-134

  Beaman, C Philip ^a   Bridges, Andrew M ^b   Scott, Sophie K ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF READING   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WOLVERHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Auditory attention; Ignored speech; Informational masking

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTIC IMPEDANCE; ATTENTION; AUDITORY LATERALIZATION; AUDITORY MEMORY; BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE; BRAIN DEPTH STIMULATION; CONFERENCE PAPER; DICHOTIC LISTENING; EVOKED AUDITORY RESPONSE; HEARING; HEMISPHERE; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; HUMAN; NEUROIMAGING; NOISE; PITCH; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; SEMANTICS; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; SPEECH PERCEPTION; SUBICULUM; TASK PERFORMANCE; WORKING MEMORY;

EID: 33847075754     PISSN: 00109452     EISSN: 00109452     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70450-7     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (81)

1. Awh E, Jonides J, Smith EE, Schumacher EH, Koeppe RA and Katz S. Dissociation of storage and rehearsal in verbal working memory. Psychological Science, 7: 25-31, 1996.
2. Baddeley AD. Working Memory. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986.
3. Baddeley AD. Working memory: Looking back and looking forwards. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4: 829-839, 2003.
4. Baddeley AD and Weiskrantz L. Attention: Selection, Awareness and Control. A tribute to Donald Broadbent. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993.
5. Beaman CP. The irrelevant sound phenomenon revisited: What role for working memory capacity? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 30: 1106-1118, 2004.
6. Beaman CP and Jones DM. The role of serial order in the irrelevant speech effect: Tests of the changing-state hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 23: 459-471, 1997.
7. Beaman CP and Jones DM. Irrelevant sound disrupts order information in free recall as in serial recall. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51A: 615-636, 1998.
8. Blesser B. Speech perception under conditions of spectral transformation: I. Phonetic characteristics. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 15: 5-41, 1972.
9. Bridges AM and Jones DM. Word-dose in the disruption of serial recall by irrelevant speech: Phonological confusions or changing state? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A: 919-939, 1996.
10. Broadbent DE. Perception and Communication. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1958.
11. Broadbent DE and Gregory M. Accuracy and recognition for speech presented to the right and left ears. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 16: 359-360, 1964.
12. Buchner A and Erdfelder E. Word frequency of irrelevant speech distractors affects serial recall. Memory and Cognition, 33: 86-97, 2005.
13. Buchner A, Irmen L and Erdfelder E. On the irrelevance of semantic information for the "irrelevant speech" effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A: 765-779, 1996.
14. Buchner A, Rothermund, K Wentura D and Mehl B. Valence of distractor words increases the effects of irrelevant speech on serial recall. Memory and Cognition, 32: 722-731, 2004.
15. Buchner A, Steffens MC, Irmen L and Wender KF. Irrelevant auditory material affects counting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 24: 48-67, 1998.
16. Buchsbaum BR, Hickok G and Humphries C. Role of left posterior superior temporal gyrus in phonological processing for speech perception and production. Cognitive Science, 25: 663-678, 2001.
17. Cambell T. The cognitive neuroscience of auditory distraction. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9: 3-5, 2005.
18. Cherry EC. Some experiments on the recognition of speech with one and two ears. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 25: 975-979, 1953.
19. Connolly JF. Stability of pathway-hemispheric differences in the auditory event related potential (ERP) to monaural stimulation. Psychophysiology, 22: 87-96, 1985.
20. Conway AR, Cowan N and Bunting MF. The cocktail party phenomenon revisited: The importance of working memory capacity. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 8: 331-335, 2001.
21. Conway AR and Engle RW. Working memory and retrieval: A resource dependent inhibition model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123: 354-373, 1994.
22. Cowan N. Attention and Memory: An Integrated Framework. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995.
23. Cowan N and Barron A. Cross-modal, auditory-visual Stroop interference and possible implications for speech memory. Perception and Psychophysics, 41: 393-401, 1987.
24. Daneman M and Carpenter PA. Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19: 450-466, 1980.
25. Driver J and Baylis GC. Cross-modal negative priming and interference in selective attention. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 31: 45-48, 1993.
26. Ellermeier W and Zimmer K. Individual differences in susceptibility to the "irrelevant speech effect". Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 102: 2191-2199, 1997.
27. Elliott EM and Cowan N. Coherence of the irrelevant sound effect: Individual profiles of short-term memory and susceptibility to task-irrelevant materials. Memory and Cognition, 33: 761-767, 2005.
28. Elliott EM, Cowan N and Valle-Inclan F. The nature of cross-modal color-word interference effects. Perception and Psychophysics, 60: 761-767, 1998.
29. Engle RW. What is working memory capacity? In Roediger HL III, Nairne JS, Neath I and Surprenant AM (Eds), The Nature of Remembering: Essays in Honor of Robert G. Crowder. Washington D.C.: APA, 2001.
30. Engle RW, Conway AR, Tuholski SW and Shisler RJ. A resource account of inhibition. Psychological Science, 6: 122-125, 1995.
31. Engle RW, Kane MJ and Tuholski ST. Individual differences in working memory capacity and what they tell us about controlled attention, general fluid intelligence and functions of the prefrontal cortex. In Miyake A and Shah P (Eds), Models of Working Memory: Mechanisms of Active Maintenance and Executive Control. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
32. Festen J and Plomp R. Effects of fluctuating noise and interfering speech on the speech reception threshold for impaired and normal hearing. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 88: 1725-36, 1990.
33. Fodor J. The Modularity of Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1983.
34. Gisselgård J, Petersson KM, Baddeley A and Ingvar M. The irrelevant speech effect: A PET study. Neuropsychologia, 41: 1899-1911, 2003.
35. Gisselgård J, Petersson KM and Ingvar M. The irrelevant speech effect and working memory load. NeuroImage, 22: 1107-1116, 2004.
36. Hadlington L, Bridges AM and Beaman CP. A left-ear disadvantage for the presentation of irrelevant sound: Manipulations of task requirements and changing state. Brain and Cognition, 61: 159-171, 2006.
37. Hadlington L, Bridges AM and Darby RJ. Auditory location in the irrelevant sound effect: The effects of presenting auditory stimuli to either the left ear, right ear or both ears. Brain and Cognition, 55: 545-557, 2004.
38. Henson RN. Neural working memory. In Andrade J (Ed), Working Memory in Perspective. Hove: Psychology Press, 2001.
39. Henson RN, Burgess N and Frith CD. Recoding, storage, rehearsal and grouping in verbal short-term memory: An fMRI study. Neuropsychologia, 38: 426-440, 2000.
40. Hickok G and Buchsbaum B. Temporal lobe speech perception systems are part of the verbal working memory circuit: Evidence from two recent fMRI studies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 26: 740-741, 2001.
41. Hugdahl K. Dichotic listening in the study of auditory laterality. In Hugdhal K and Davidson RJ (Eds), The Asymmetrical Brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003.
42. Hughes RW and Jones DM. A negative order repetition priming effect: Inhibition of order in unattended sequences? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29: 199-218, 2003.
43. Hughes RW and Jones DM. The impact of order incongruence between a task-irrelevant auditory sequence and a task-relevant visual sequence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31: 316-327, 2005.
44. Jones DM, Beaman CP and Macken WJ. The object-oriented episodic record model. In Gathercole SE (Ed), Models of Short-Term Memory. Hove: Psychology Press, 1996.
45. Jones DM and Macken WJ. Irrelevant tones produce an irrelevant speech effect: Implications for phonological coding in working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 19: 369-381, 1993.
46. Jones DM and Macken WJ. Organizational factors in the effect of irrelevant speech: The role of spatial location and timing. Memory and Cognition, 23: 192-200, 1995.
47. Jones DM, Macken WJ and Murray AC. Disruption of visual short-term memory by changing-state auditory stimuli: The role of segmentation. Memory and Cognition, 21: 318-328, 1993.
48. Jones DM, Macken WJ and Nicholls AP. The phonological store of working memory: Is it phonological and is it a store? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 30: 656-674, 2004.
49. Jones DM, Madden C and Miles C. Privileged access by irrelevant speech to short-term memory: The role of changing-state. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 44A: 645-669, 1992.
50. Jones DM, Miles C and Page J. Disruption of proof-reading by irrelevant speech: Effects of attention, arousal or memory? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 4: 89-108, 1990.
51. Jonides J, Schumacher EH, Smith EE, Koeppe RA, Awh E, Reuter-Lorenz PA, Marshuetz C and Willis CR. The role of parietal cortex in verbal working memory. The Journal of Neuroscience, 18: 5026-5034, 1998.
52. Kane MJ and Engle RW. Working memory capacity, proactive interference and divided attention: Limits on long-term memory retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 26: 336-358, 2000.
53. Kimura D. Cerebral dominance and the perception of verbal stimuli. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 15: 166-171, 1961.
54. Kimura D. Functional asymmetry of the brain in dichotic listening. Cortex, 3: 163-168, 1967.
55. LeCompte DC. Extending the irrelevant speech effect beyond serial recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 20: 1396-1408, 1994.
56. Logie RH, Venneri A, Della Sala S, Redpath TW and Marshall I. Brain activation and the phonological loop: The impact of rehearsal. Brain and Cognition, 53: 293-296, 2003.
57. Macken WJ, Tremblay S, Houghton RJ, Nicholls AP and Jones DM. Does auditory streaming require attention? Evidence from attentional selectivity in short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29: 43-51, 2003.
58. Majkowski J, Bochenek Z, Bochenek W, Kanpik-Fijalkowska D and Kopec J. Latency of average evoked potentials to contralateral and ipsilateral auditory stimulation in normal subjects. Brain Research, 24: 416-419, 1971.
59. Maximilian VA. Cortical blood flow asymmetry during monaural verbal stimulation. Brain and Language, 15: 1-11, 1982.
60. Moray N. Attention in dichotic listening: Affecfive cues and the influence of instructions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 11: 56-60, 1959.
61. Narain C, Scott SK, Wise RJ, Rosen S, Leff A, Iversen SD and Matthews PM. Defining a left-lateralized response specific to intelligible speech using fMRI. Cerebral Cortex, 13: 1362-1368, 2003.
62. Neath I, Farley LA and Surprenant A. Directly assessing the relationship between irrelevant speech and articulatory suppression. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A: 1269-1278, 2003.
63. Neath I and Suprenant A. Individual Differences and the Irrelevant Speech Effect. Unpublished manuscript, 2004.
64. Neely CB and LeCompte DC. The importance of semantic similarity to the irrelevant speech effect. Memory and Cognition, 27: 37-4-4, 1999.
65. Nicholls AP and Jones DM. Capturing the suffix: Cognitive streaming in immediate serial recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 28: 12-28, 2002.
66. Osaka M, Nishizaki Y, Komori M and Osaka N. Effect of focus on verbal working memory: Critical role of the focus word in reading. Memory and Cognition, 20: 562-571, 2002.
67. Oswald CJ, Tremblay S and Jones DM. Disruption of comprehension by the meaning of irrelevant speech. Memory, 8: 345-350, 2000.
68. Patterson RD, Uppenkamp S, Johnsrude IS and Griffiths TD. The processing of temporal pitch and melody information in auditory cortex. Neuron, 36: 767-776, 2002.
69. Paulesu E, Frith CD and Frackowiak RS. The neural correlates of the verbal component of working memory. Nature, 362: 342-344, 1993.
70. Rosen VM and Engle RW. Working memory capacity and suppression. Journal of Memory and Language, 39: 418-436, 1989.
71. Rosenzweig MR. Representations of the tow ears at the auditory cortex. American Journal of Physiology, 167: 147-214, 1951.
72. Schumacher EH, Lauber E, Awh E, Jpnes J, Smith EE and Koeppe RA. PET evidence for an amodal verbal working memory system. NeuroImage, 3: 79-88, 1996.
73. Scott SK, Blank CC, Rosen S and Wise RJ. Identification of a pathway for intelligible speech in the left temporal lobe. Brain, 123: 2400-2406, 2000.
74. Scott SK, Rosen S, Davis J, Beaman CP and Wise RJ. The neural processing of unattended speech: dual mechanisms in the cocktail party effect? Submitted.
75. Scott SK, Rosen S, Wickham L and Wise RJ. A positron emission tomography study of the neural basis of informational and energetic masking effects in speech perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 115: 813-821, 2004.
76. Smith EE, Jonides J and Koeppe RA. Dissociating verbal and spatial working memory using PET. Cerebral Cortex, 6: 11-20, 1996.
77. Storm EE, Jonides J, Marshuetz C and Koeppe RA. Components of verbal working memory: Evidence from neuroimaging. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 95: 876-882, 1998.
78. Studdert-Kennedy M and Shankweiler DP. Hemispheric specialization for speech perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 48: 579-594, 1970.
79. Turner ML and Engle RW. Is working memory capacity task-dependent. Journal of Memory and Language, 28: 127:154, 1989.
80. Wood N and Cowan N. The cocktail party phenomenon revisited: How frequent are attention shifts to one's name in an irrelevant auditory channel? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 2: 255-260, 1995.
81. Zatorre RJ, Evans AC, Meyer E and Gjedde A. Lateralization of phonetic and pitch discrimination in speech processing. Science, 256: 846-849, 1992.