Working Memory Capacity as a Determinant of Proactive Interference and Auditory Distraction

Individual differences in working memory capacity are related to performance on a range of elemental and higher order cognitive tasks. The current experiment tests the assumptions of two theoretical approaches to working memory capacity: working memory as executive attention and working memory as te...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Gerald Tehan, Madeleine Arber, Georgina Anne Tolan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Ubiquity Press 2018-01-01
Series:Journal of Cognition
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.journalofcognition.org/articles/7
id doaj-84281d9aa74d42f3b7fc8e791bbd1318
record_format Article
spelling doaj-84281d9aa74d42f3b7fc8e791bbd13182020-11-25T02:32:54ZengUbiquity PressJournal of Cognition2514-48202018-01-011110.5334/joc.76Working Memory Capacity as a Determinant of Proactive Interference and Auditory DistractionGerald Tehan0Madeleine Arber1Georgina Anne Tolan2University of Southern Queensland, IpswichUniversity of Southern Queensland, IpswichAustralian Catholic UniversityIndividual differences in working memory capacity are related to performance on a range of elemental and higher order cognitive tasks. The current experiment tests the assumptions of two theoretical approaches to working memory capacity: working memory as executive attention and working memory as temporary binding. These approaches are examined using a short-term updating task where proactive interference is manipulated, such that old responses have to be suppressed in favour of new responses. A second source of distraction is introduced by way of irrelevant, to-be-ignored background speech that accompanies presentation of the list items. This speech reinforces either the to-be-remembered item on the current list, or the to-be-suppressed item. Working memory capacity was significantly related to overall level of correct performance on the short-term task, and to the degree of proactive interference experienced. However, there was no evidence for individual differences in the ability to suppress the interfering foil, nor in priming effects associated with the irrelevant speech. The results provided little support for the working memory capacity as executive attention perspective, some evidence for the binding perspective, but also evidence supporting the fact that some effects of distraction are not under voluntary control.https://www.journalofcognition.org/articles/7Working memorySpeech perceptionAttention
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Gerald Tehan
Madeleine Arber
Georgina Anne Tolan
spellingShingle Gerald Tehan
Madeleine Arber
Georgina Anne Tolan
Working Memory Capacity as a Determinant of Proactive Interference and Auditory Distraction
Journal of Cognition
Working memory
Speech perception
Attention
author_facet Gerald Tehan
Madeleine Arber
Georgina Anne Tolan
author_sort Gerald Tehan
title Working Memory Capacity as a Determinant of Proactive Interference and Auditory Distraction
title_short Working Memory Capacity as a Determinant of Proactive Interference and Auditory Distraction
title_full Working Memory Capacity as a Determinant of Proactive Interference and Auditory Distraction
title_fullStr Working Memory Capacity as a Determinant of Proactive Interference and Auditory Distraction
title_full_unstemmed Working Memory Capacity as a Determinant of Proactive Interference and Auditory Distraction
title_sort working memory capacity as a determinant of proactive interference and auditory distraction
publisher Ubiquity Press
series Journal of Cognition
issn 2514-4820
publishDate 2018-01-01
description Individual differences in working memory capacity are related to performance on a range of elemental and higher order cognitive tasks. The current experiment tests the assumptions of two theoretical approaches to working memory capacity: working memory as executive attention and working memory as temporary binding. These approaches are examined using a short-term updating task where proactive interference is manipulated, such that old responses have to be suppressed in favour of new responses. A second source of distraction is introduced by way of irrelevant, to-be-ignored background speech that accompanies presentation of the list items. This speech reinforces either the to-be-remembered item on the current list, or the to-be-suppressed item. Working memory capacity was significantly related to overall level of correct performance on the short-term task, and to the degree of proactive interference experienced. However, there was no evidence for individual differences in the ability to suppress the interfering foil, nor in priming effects associated with the irrelevant speech. The results provided little support for the working memory capacity as executive attention perspective, some evidence for the binding perspective, but also evidence supporting the fact that some effects of distraction are not under voluntary control.
topic Working memory
Speech perception
Attention
url https://www.journalofcognition.org/articles/7
work_keys_str_mv AT geraldtehan workingmemorycapacityasadeterminantofproactiveinterferenceandauditorydistraction
AT madeleinearber workingmemorycapacityasadeterminantofproactiveinterferenceandauditorydistraction
AT georginaannetolan workingmemorycapacityasadeterminantofproactiveinterferenceandauditorydistraction
_version_ 1724816911885139968