The involuntary capture of attention by novel feature pairings: A study of voice—location integration in auditory sensory memory

Parmentier, Fabrice B. R.; Maybery, Murray T.; Elsley, Jane V.

doi:10.3758/app.72.2.279

Cited by 34 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results also demonstrate that object files can be maintained in short-term memory for at least 1900 ms after the prime response. Together, the present findings nicely add to the growing experimental evidence for object file binding in auditory processing (Dyson & Ishfaq, 2008;Hall, Pastore, Acker, & Huang, 2000;Maybery et al, 2009;Mondor, Zatorre, & Terrio, 1998;Parmentier, Maybery, & Elsley, 2010;Zmigrod & Hommel, 2009, while inhibitory distractor processing might only affect immediate responding for less than 600 ms or might require more than 1900 ms to come into play.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

The time-course of distractor processing in auditory spatial negative priming

Möller

Mayr

Buchner

2015

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The spatial negative priming effect denotes slowed-down and sometimes more error-prone responding to a location that previously contained a distractor as compared with a previously unoccupied location. In vision, this effect has been attributed to the inhibition of irrelevant locations, and recently, of their task-assigned responses. Interestingly, auditory versions of the task did not yield evidence for inhibitory processing of task-irrelevant events which might suggest modality-specific distractor processing in vision and audition. Alternatively, the inhibitory processes may differ in how they develop over time. If this were the case, the absence of inhibitory after-effects might be due to an inappropriate timing of successive presentations in previous auditory spatial negative priming tasks. Specifically, the distractor may not yet have been inhibited or inhibition may already have dissipated at the time performance is assessed. The present study was conducted to test these alternatives. Participants indicated the location of a target sound in the presence of a concurrent distractor sound. Performance was assessed between two successive prime-probe presentations. The time between the prime response and the probe sounds (response-stimulus interval, RSI) was systematically varied between three groups (600, 1250, 1900 ms). For all RSI groups, the results showed no evidence for inhibitory distractor processing but conformed to the predictions of the feature mismatching hypothesis. The results support the assumption that auditory distractor processing does not recruit an inhibitory mechanism but involves the integration of spatial and sound identity features into common representations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

The time-course of distractor processing in auditory spatial negative priming

Möller

Mayr

Buchner

2015

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The error bars depict the standard errors of the means. Note that the standard errors cannot be used to estimate any differences between the displayed conditions Zatorre, & Terrio, 1998;Parmentier, Maybery, & Elsley, 2010;Zmigrod & Hommel, 2009. The absence of response-related aftereffects in auditory spatial negative priming differs from related findings in the visual modality Guy & Buckolz, 2007;Guy et al, 2006) and might, therefore, be informative with respect to modality-specific mechanisms underlying target selection in the presence of distractor information.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Target localization among concurrent sound sources: No evidence for the inhibition of previous distractor responses

Möller

Mayr

Buchner

2012

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The visuospatial negative priming effect-that is, the slowed-down responding to a previously ignored location-is partly due to response inhibition associated with the previously ignored location (Buckolz, Goldfarb, & Khan, Perception & Psychophysics 66:837-845 2004). We tested whether response inhibition underlies spatial negative priming in the auditory modality as well. Eighty participants localized a target sound while ignoring a simultaneous distractor sound at another location. Eight possible sound locations were arranged in a semicircle around the participant. Pairs of adjacent locations were associated with the same response. On ignored repetition trials, the probe target sound was played from the same location as the previously ignored prime sound. On response control trials, prime distractor and probe target were played from different locations but were associated with the same response. On control trials, prime distractor and probe target shared neither location nor response. A response inhibition account predicts sloweddown responding when the response associated with the prime distractor has to be executed in the probe. There was no evidence of response inhibition in audition. Instead, the negative priming effect depended on whether the sound at the repeatedly occupied location changed identity between prime and probe. The latter result replicates earlier findings and supports the feature mismatching hypothesis, while the former is compatible with the assumption that response inhibition is irrelevant in auditory spatial attention.

show abstract

“…Of interest, the capture of attention by unexpected sounds is also characterized by a well-defined behavioral effect, as can be observed, for example, in the cross-modal oddball task (e.g., Andrés, Parmentier, & Escera, 2006;Escera, Alho, Winkler, & Näätänen, 1998;Parmentier, 2008;Parmentier, Elsley, Andrés, & Barceló, 2011;Parmentier, Elsley, & Ljungberg, 2010;Parmentier, Maybery, & Elsley, 2010;Parmentier, Turner, & Elsley, 2011; see also Parmentier, Ljungberg, Elsley, & Lindkvist, 2011, for similar findings with the use of vibratory distracters).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

The Impact of Intonation and Valence on Objective and Subjective Attention Capture by Auditory Alarms

Ljungberg

Parmentier

2012

Hum Factors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The objective was to study the involuntary capture of attention by spoken words varying in intonation and valence. Background: In studies of verbal alarms, the propensity of alarms to capture attention has been primarily assessed with the use of subjective ratings of their perceived urgency. Past studies suggest that such ratings vary with the alarms’ spoken urgency and content. Method: We measured attention capture by spoken words varying in valence (negative vs. neutral) and intonation (urgently vs. nonurgently spoken) through subjective ratings and behavioral measures. The key behavioral measure was the response latency to visual stimuli in the presence of spoken words breaking away from the periodical repetition of a tone. Results: The results showed that all words captured attention relative to a baseline standard tone but that this effect was partly counteracted by a relative speeding of responses for urgently compared with nonurgently spoken words. Word valence did not affect behavioral performance. Rating data showed that both intonation and valence increased significantly perceived urgency and attention grabbing without any interaction. Conclusion: The data suggest a congruency between subjective ratings and behavioral performance with respect to spoken intonation but not valence. Application: This study demonstrates the usefulness and feasibility of objective measures of attention capture to help design efficient alarm systems.

show abstract

The involuntary capture of attention by novel feature pairings: A study of voice—location integration in auditory sensory memory

Cited by 34 publications

References 44 publications

The time-course of distractor processing in auditory spatial negative priming

The time-course of distractor processing in auditory spatial negative priming

Target localization among concurrent sound sources: No evidence for the inhibition of previous distractor responses

The Impact of Intonation and Valence on Objective and Subjective Attention Capture by Auditory Alarms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About