Abstract

The duplex-mechanism account of auditory distraction postulates that two distinct forms of auditory distraction can be distinguished by whether or not they can be cognitively controlled. While the interference-by-process component of auditory distraction is postulated to be automatic and independent of cognitive control, the stimulus-aspecific attention capture by auditory deviants and the stimulus-specific attentional diversion by auditorily presented distractor sentences should be suppressed by increased task engagement. Here we test whether incentive-induced changes in task engagement affect the disruption of serial recall by auditory deviants (Experiment 1) and distractor sentences (Experiment 2). Monetary incentives substantially affected recall performance in both experiments. However, the incentive-induced changes in task engagement had only limited effects on auditory distraction. In Experiment 2, increased task engagement was associated with a small decrease of distraction relative to a quiet condition, but strong effects of auditory distraction on performance persisted in conditions of high task engagement in both experiments. Most importantly, and in contrast to the predictions of the duplex-mechanism account, the effects of stimulus-aspecific attention capture (Experiment 1) and stimulus-specific attentional diversion (Experiment 2) remained unaffected by incentive-induced changes in task engagement. These findings are consistent with an automatic-capture account according to which only the processes responsible for the deliberate memorization of the target items are dependent on controlled mental effort while the attention capture by auditory deviants and the attentional diversion by distractor speech are largely automatic.

Highlights

  • Cognitive performance is often found to be disrupted by auditory distraction (e.g., Ellermeier & Zimmer, 2014)

  • We examine the effects of monetary incentives on cross-modal selective attention and thereby test whether auditory distraction is under cognitive control

  • The main aim of the present study was to test the prediction of the duplex-mechanism account (Hughes, 2014) that changes in top-down task engagement should affect stimulus-aspecific attention capture and stimulus-specific attentional diversion while it should have no influence on the changing-state effect

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Cognitive performance is often found to be disrupted by auditory distraction (e.g., Ellermeier & Zimmer, 2014). These standard experimental tasks constitute model tasks for real-life situations in which a deviation from ongoing processing does not have serious consequences (such as when listening to music while reading a book for pleasure) It is unclear whether the results obtained in such tasks generalize to situations with external incentives for good performance because direct evidence regarding the effect of external incentives on auditory distraction is rare (for an exception, According to the expected value of control theory (Shenhav et al, 2013, 2016), people engage in cognitive control to maximize reward. There is evidence that the distracting effect of emotional (e.g., erotic) stimuli is reduced by providing external (monetary) incentives for focusing on simultaneously presented visual targets (Walsh et al, 2018) This finding can be interpreted as suggesting that orienting to intrinsically interesting stimuli is partly under cognitive control, implying that the tradeoff between the nominally relevant and irrelevant material involves a deliberate decision on how intensely each stream of information is to be processed. The violation of an expectation rather than the auditory change per se that is responsible for the disruption (Hughes et al, 2007; Marsh et al, 2014; Röer et al, 2014)

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call