Department of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Department of Psychology and Psychotherapy, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.
Psychol Res. 2021 Nov;85(8):2997-3009. doi: 10.1007/s00426-020-01455-5. Epub 2020 Dec 19.
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.
双机制听觉分心理论假设,可以根据听觉分心是否可以被认知控制来区分两种不同形式的听觉分心。虽然听觉分心的过程干扰成分被假设为自动的,不受认知控制的影响,但听觉偏离引起的刺激非特异性注意捕获和听觉呈现的分心句子引起的刺激特异性注意力转移应该被增加的任务参与所抑制。在这里,我们测试了任务参与的激励诱导变化是否会影响听觉偏离(实验 1)和分心句子(实验 2)对序列回忆的干扰。货币奖励在两个实验中都显著影响了回忆表现。然而,任务参与的激励诱导变化对听觉分心只有有限的影响。在实验 2 中,与安静条件相比,增加任务参与与分心的小幅度减少相关,但在两个实验的高任务参与条件下,听觉分心对表现的强烈影响仍然存在。最重要的是,与双机制理论的预测相反,刺激非特异性注意捕获(实验 1)和刺激特异性注意力转移(实验 2)的影响不受任务参与的激励诱导变化的影响。这些发现与自动捕获理论一致,即只有负责故意记忆目标项目的过程依赖于受控的心理努力,而听觉偏离引起的注意捕获和分心言语引起的注意力转移在很大程度上是自动的。