Hemispheric asymmetries in auditory distraction

Brain and Cognition

Volumn 74, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 79-87

  Sörqvist, Patrik ^a   Marsh, John E ^b   Jahncke, Helena ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GÄVLE   (Sweden)

^b CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Hemispheric asymmetries; Left ear disadvantage; Right ear disadvantage; Semantic auditory distraction

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDITORY MEMORY; BRAIN ASYMMETRY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISTRACTIBILITY; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LANGUAGE PROCESSING; LEFT HEMISPHERE; LINGUISTICS; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECALL; SEMANTIC MEMORY; SHORT TERM MEMORY; TASK PERFORMANCE; VERBAL MEMORY;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTENTION; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; MEMORY, SHORT-TERM;

EID: 77956178421     PISSN: 02782626     EISSN: 10902147     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.bandc.2010.06.007     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Andrews S. The effect of orthographic similarity on lexical retrieval: Resolving neighborhood conflicts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1997, 4:439-461.
2. Beaman C.P. The irrelevant sound phenomenon revisited: What role for working memory capacity?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 2004, 30:1106-1118.
3. Beaman C.P., Bridges A.M., Scott S.K. From dichotic listening to the irrelevant sound effect: A behavioural and neuroimaging analysis of the processing of unattended speech. Cortex 2007, 43:124-134.
4. Beaman C.P., Jones D.M. The role of serial order in the irrelevant speech effect: Tests of the changing-state hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 1997, 23:459-471.
5. Beaman C.P., Jones D.M. Irrelevant sound disrupts order information in free recall as in serial recall. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1998, 51A:615-636.
6. Bloom J.S., Hynd G.W. The role of the corpus callosum in interhemispheric transfer of information: Excitation or inhibition?. Neuropsychology Review 2005, 15:59-71.
7. Bousfield W.A. The occurrence of clustering in the recall of randomly arranged associates. Journal of General Psychology 1953, 49:229-240.
8. Buchner A., Irmen L., Erdfelder E. On the irrelevance of semantic information for the " irrelevant speech" effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1996, 49A:765-779.
9. Buchner A., Rothermund K., Wentura D., Mehl B. Valence of distractor words increases the effects of irrelevant speech on serial recall. Memory & Cognition 2004, 32:722-731.
10. Buchsbaum B.R., Hickok G., Humphries C. Role of left posterior superior temporal gyrus in phonological processing for speech perception and production. Cognitive Science 2001, 25:663-678.
11. Bradshaw J.L., Nettleton N.C. Monaural asymmetries. Handbook of dichotic listening: Theory, methods and research 1988, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, England. K. Hugdahl (Ed.).
12. Clark J.M., Lufkin R.B., Zaidel E. Corpus callosum morphometry and dichotic listening performance. Individual differences in functional interhemispheric inhibition?. Neuropsychologia 1993, 31:547-557.
13. Elliott E., Cowan N. Coherence of the irrelevant-sound effect: Individual profiles of short-term memory and susceptibility to task-irrelevant materials. Memory & Cognition 2005, 33:664-675.
14. Fernandino L., Iacoboni M., Zaidel E. The effects of bilateral presentations on lateralized lexical decision. Brain & Cognition 2007, 64:60-67.
15. Grimshaw G.M., Kwasny K.M., Covell E., Johnson R.A. The dynamic nature of language lateralization: Effects of lexical and prosodic factors. Neuropsychologia 2003, 41:1008-1019.
16. Gruber A.J., Bayan P., Gutkin B.S., Solla S.A. Dopamine modulation in the basal ganglia locks the gate to working memory. Journal of Computational Neuroscience 2006, 20:153-166.
17. Hadlington L.J., Bridges A.M., Beaman C.P. A left-ear disadvantage for the presentation of irrelevant sound: Manipulations of task requirements and changing state. Brain & Cognition 2006, 61:159-171.
18. Hadlington L.J., Bridges A.M., Darby R.D. Auditory location in the irrelevant sound effect: The effects of presenting auditory stimuli to either the left, right or both ears. Brain & Cognition 2004, 55:545-557.
19. Hugdahl K., Westerhausen R., Alho K., Medvedev S., Laine M., Hämäläinen H. Attention and cognitive control: Unfolding the dichotic listening story. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 2009, 50:11-22.
20. Hughes R.W., Vachon F., Jones D.M. Disruption of short-term memory by changing and deviant sounds: Support for a duplex-mechanism account of auditory distraction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 2007, 33:1050-1061.
21. Jones D.M., Macken W.J. Irrelevant tones produce an irrelevant speech effect: Implications for phonological coding in working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 1993, 19:369-381.
22. Kinsbourne M. The cerebral basis of lateral asymmetries in attention. Acta Psychologia 1970, 33:193-201.
23. Macken W.J., Phelps F.G., Jones D.M. What causes auditory distraction?. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2009, 16:139-144.
24. Macken W., Tremblay S., Alford D., Jones D. Attentional selectivity in short-term memory: Similarity of process, not similarity of content, determines disruption. International Journal of Psychology 1999, 34:322-327.
25. McNab F., Klingberg T. Prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia control access to working memory. Nature Neuroscience 2008, 11:103-107.
26. Marsh J.E., Hughes R.W., Jones D.M. Auditory distraction in semantic memory: A process-based approach. Journal of Memory & Language 2008, 58:682-700.
27. Marsh J.E., Hughes R.W., Jones D.M. Interference by process, not content, determines semantic auditory distraction. Cognition 2009, 110:23-38.
28. Marsh, J. E., & Jones, D. M. (in press). Cross-modal distraction by background speech: What role for meaning? Noise & Health.
29. Marshuetz C. Order information in working memory: An integrative review of evidence from brain and behavior. Psychological Bulletin 2005, 131:323-339.
30. Nairne J.S., Riegler G.L., Serra M. Dissociative effects of generation on item and order retention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 1991, 17:702-709.
31. Oswald C.J.P., Tremblay S., Jones D.M. Disruption of comprehension by the meaning of irrelevant sound. Memory 2000, 8:345-350.
32. Poeppel D., Guillemin A., Thompson J., Fritz J., Bavelier D., Braun A.R. Auditory lexical decision, categorical perception, and FM direction discrimination differentially engage left and right auditory cortex. Neuropsychologia 2004, 42:183-200.
33. Scott S.K., Blank C.C., Rosen S., Wise R.J. Identification of a pathway for intelligible speech in the left temporal lobe. Brain 2000, 123:2400-2406.
34. Scott S.K., Rosen S., Beaman C.P., Davis J.P., Wise R.J.S. The neural processing of masked speech: Evidence for different mechanisms in the left and right temporal lobes. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2009, 125:1737-1743.
35. Scott S.K., Rosen S., Wickham L., Wise R.J. 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 2004, 115:813-821.
36. Searleman A. A review of right hemisphere linguistic capabilities. Psychological Bulletin 1977, 84:503-528.
37. Shankweiler D. Effects of temporal lobe damage on perception of dichotically presented melodies. Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology 1966, 62:115-119.
38. Sörqvist P. Effects of aircraft noise and speech on prose memory: What role for working memory capacity?. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2010, 30:112-118.
39. Sörqvist P. High working memory capacity attenuates the deviation effect but not the changing-state effect: Further support for the duplex-mechanism account of auditory distraction. Memory & Cognition 2010, 38:651-658.
40. Sörqvist, P. (in press). The role of working memory capacity in auditory distraction: A review. Noise & Health.
41. Sörqvist P., Halin N., Hygge S. Individual differences in susceptibility to the effects of speech on reading comprehension. Applied Cognitive Psychology 2010, 24:67-76.
42. Sörqvist P., Ljungberg J.K., Ljung R. A sub-process view of working memory capacity: Evidence from effects of speech on prose memory. Memory 2010, 18:310-326.
43. Tervaniemi M., Hugdahl K. Lateralization of auditory-cortex functions. Brain Research Reviews 2003, 43:231-246.
44. Tremblay S., Nicholls A.P., Alford D., Jones D.M. The irrelevant sound effect: Does speech play a special role?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory &Cognition 2000, 26:1750-1754.
45. Tzourio N., Crivello F., Mellet E., Nkanga-Ngila B., Mazoyer B. Functional anatomy for speech comprehension in left-handers vs. Right-handers. NeuroImage 1998, 8:1-16.
46. Van Overshelde J., Rawson K.A., Dunlosky J. Category norms: An expanded and updated version of the Battig and Montague (1969) norms. Journal of Memory & Language 2004, 50:289-334.
47. Westerhausen R., Hugdahl K. The corpus callosum in dichotic listening studies of hemispheric asymmetry: A review of clinical and experimental evidence. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 2008, 32:1044-1054.
48. Zahn R., Huber W., Drews E., Erbericher S., Krings T., Willmes K., et al. Hemispheric lateralization at different levels of human auditory word processing: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Neuroscience Letters 2000, 287:195-198.
49. Zatorre R.J., Evans A.C., Meyer E. Neural mechanisms underlying melodic perception and memory for pitch. Journal of Neuroscience 1994, 14:1908-1919.