The N1 hypothesis and irrelevant sound:: evidence from token set size effects

被引:33
作者
Campbell, T
Winkler, I
Kujala, T
Näätänen, R
机构
[1] Hungarian Acad Sci, Inst Psychol, H-1394 Budapest, Hungary
[2] Univ Helsinki, Cognit Brain Res Unit, Helsinki, Finland
[3] Univ Helsinki, Helsinki Brain Res Ctr, Helsinki, Finland
[4] Univ Helsinki, Helsinki Collegium Adv Studies, Helsinki, Finland
来源
COGNITIVE BRAIN RESEARCH | 2003年 / 18卷 / 01期
关键词
token set size; irrelevant sound effect; auditory N1; immediate memory; serial recall;
D O I
10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2003.09.001
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
This study investigated how increases in the number of different types of sound (token set size) within a heard but ignored sequence influence brain activity and performance in a serial recall task (the irrelevant sound effect). We tested the hypothesis that brain processes affected by the refractory state of the neuronal populations involved in generating the auditory N1 play a role in the memory disruption produced by irrelevant sound. Auditory event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded when volunteers performed a serial recall task that required remembering lists of visually presented numbers that were followed by a distractor-filled retention interval. The results showed that both increments in set size from 1 to 2 and from 2 to 5 elicited an increase of the N1 amplitude. Furthermore, increases in set size from 2 to 5, but not from 1 to 2, caused a significant decrease of the serial recall performance. This result suggested that, if N1 were to play a role in the disruption produced by irrelevant sound, the processes underlying the N1 wave may only serve as a necessary rather than a sufficient condition for disruption. (C) 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:39 / 47
页数:9
相关论文
共 53 条
[1]   2 SEPARATE FRONTAL COMPONENTS IN THE N1 WAVE OF THE HUMAN AUDITORY-EVOKED RESPONSE [J].
ALCAINI, M ;
GIARD, MH ;
THEVENET, M ;
PERNIER, J .
PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY, 1994, 31 (06) :611-615
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1986, OXFORD PSYCHOL SERIE
[3]   Disruption of office-related tasks by speech and office noise [J].
Banbury, S ;
Berry, DC .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 1998, 89 :499-517
[4]   Habituation and dishabituation to speech and office noise [J].
Banbury, S ;
Berry, DC .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-APPLIED, 1997, 3 (03) :181-195
[5]   Auditory distraction and short-term memory: Phenomena and practical implications [J].
Banbury, SP ;
Macken, WJ ;
Tremblay, S ;
Jones, DM .
HUMAN FACTORS, 2001, 43 (01) :12-29
[6]  
Beaman CP, 2000, PROCEEDINGS OF THE TWENTY-SECOND ANNUAL CONFERENCE OF THE COGNITIVE SCIENCE SOCIETY, P37
[7]   A comparison of auditory and visual distraction effects:: behavioral and event-related indices [J].
Berti, S ;
Schröger, E .
COGNITIVE BRAIN RESEARCH, 2001, 10 (03) :265-273
[9]  
CAMPBELL R, 1984, ATTENTION PERFORM, V10, P300
[10]   Auditory memory and the irrelevant sound effect: Further evidence for changing-state disruption [J].
Campbell, T ;
Beaman, CP ;
Berry, DC .
MEMORY, 2002, 10 (03) :199-214