Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMarsh, John E.
dc.contributor.authorSörqvist, Patrik
dc.contributor.authorHodgetts, Helen M.
dc.contributor.authorBeaman, C. Phillip
dc.contributor.authorJones, Dylan M.
dc.contributor.othercmet = Helen Hodgetts
dc.date.accessioned2016-07-21T10:22:09Z
dc.date.available2016-07-21T10:22:09Z
dc.date.issued2015-01
dc.identifier.citationMarsh, J.E., Sörqvist, P., Hodgetts, H.M., Beaman, C.P. and Jones, D.M. (2015) 'Distraction control processes in free recall: Benefits and costs to performance', Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(1), p.118-133.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0022-1015
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10369/7975
dc.descriptionThis article was published in Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition in January 2015, available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0037779 This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record.en_US
dc.description.abstractHow is semantic memory influenced by individual differences under conditions of distraction? This question was addressed by observing how visual target words—drawn from a single category—were recalled whilst ignoring spoken distracter words that were either members of the same, or members of a different (single) category. Distracter words were presented either synchronously or asynchronously with target words. Recall performance was correlated with participants’ working memory capacity (WMC), which was taken to be an index of the capacity for distracter inhibition. Distraction was greater from semantically similar words and distraction was greater when the words were presented synchronously. WMC was related to disruption only with synchronous, not asynchronous, presentation. Subsequent experiments found more distracter inhibition – as measured by subsequent negative priming of distracters – amongst individuals with higher WMC but this may be dependent on targets and distracters being comparable category exemplars: With less dominant category members as distracters, target recall was impaired – relative to control – only amongst individuals with low WMC. The results demonstrate distracter inhibition occurring only in conditions where target-distracter selection is challenging. Inhibition incurs costs to subsequent performance, but there is an immediate price for not inhibiting.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipFunding Agencies|Economic and Social Research Council [RES-062-23-1752]; Swedish Research Council [2010-2042]; European Network on Noise and Health granten_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherAmerican Psychological Associationen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesJournal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
dc.titleDistraction control processes in free recall: Benefits and costs to performanceen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0037779
dc.date.dateAccepted2014-10


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following collection(s)

Show simple item record