Effects of Speech on Proofreading: Can Task-Engagement Manipulations Shield Against Distraction?

被引:54
作者
Halin, Niklas [1 ]
Marsh, John E. [1 ,2 ]
Haga, Andreas [1 ]
Holmgren, Mattias [1 ]
Sorqvist, Patrik [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Gavle, Dept Bldg Energy & Environm Engn, SE-80176 Gavle, Sweden
[2] Univ Cent Lancashire, Sch Psychol, Preston PR1 2HE, Lancs, England
[3] Linkoping Univ, Linnaeus Ctr HEAD, Swedish Inst Disabil Res, Linkoping, Sweden
关键词
proofreading; irrelevant speech; auditory distraction; task engagement; WORKING-MEMORY CAPACITY; SHORT-TERM-MEMORY; DUPLEX-MECHANISM ACCOUNT; AUDITORY DISTRACTION; IRRELEVANT-SPEECH; OFFICE NOISE; INTELLECTUAL-PERFORMANCE; INDIVIDUAL-DIFFERENCES; READING-COMPREHENSION; BACKGROUND MUSIC;
D O I
10.1037/xap0000002
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
This article reports 2 experiments that examine techniques to shield against the potentially disruptive effects of task-irrelevant background speech on proofreading. The participants searched for errors in texts that were either normal (i.e., written in Times New Roman font) or altered (i.e., presented either in Haettenschweiler font or in Times New Roman but masked by visual noise) in 2 sound conditions: a silent condition and a condition with background speech. Proofreading for semantic/contextual errors was impaired by speech, but only when the text was normal. This effect of speech was completely abolished when the text was written in an altered font (Experiment 1) or when it was masked by visual noise (Experiment 2). There was no functional difference between the 2 ways to alter the text with regard to the way the manipulations influenced the effects of background speech on proofreading. The results indicate that increased task demands, which lead to greater focal-task engagement, may shield against the distracting effects of background speech on proofreading.
引用
收藏
页码:69 / 80
页数:12
相关论文
共 69 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1974, Journal of Architectural Research
[2]  
Babisch W, 2003, Noise Health, V5, P1
[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]   Office noise and employee concentration: Identifying causes of disruption and potential improvements [J].
Banbury, SP ;
Berry, DC .
ERGONOMICS, 2005, 48 (01) :25-37
[6]   Auditory distraction from low-intensity noise: A review of the consequences for learning and workplace environments [J].
Beaman, CP .
APPLIED COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2005, 19 (08) :1041-1064
[7]   The irrelevant sound phenomenon revisited: What role for working memory capacity? [J].
Beaman, CP .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION, 2004, 30 (05) :1106-1118
[8]   Age-related differences in irrelevant-speech effects [J].
Bell, Raoul ;
Buchner, Axel ;
Mund, Iris .
PSYCHOLOGY AND AGING, 2008, 23 (02) :377-391
[9]   Habituation of the Irrelevant Sound Effect: Evidence for an Attentional Theory of Short-Term Memory Disruption [J].
Bell, Raoul ;
Roeer, Jan P. ;
Dentate, Sandra ;
Buchner, Axel .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION, 2012, 38 (06) :1542-1557
[10]   Artificially induced valence of distractor words increases the effects of irrelevant speech on serial recall [J].
Buchner, Axel ;
Mehl, Bettina ;
Rothermund, Klaus ;
Wentura, Dirk .
MEMORY & COGNITION, 2006, 34 (05) :1055-1062