Differences in Auditory Distraction between Adults and Children: A Duplex-mechanism Approach.
Differences in Auditory Distraction between Adults and Children: A Duplex-mechanism Approach.
复制标题
DOI：
10.5334/joc.15
复制
发表时间：
2018-02-13
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Marsh, John E
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Joseph, Tanya N;Hughes, Robert W;Marsh, John E
研究了儿童（7 - 9岁; N = 89）与成人（18 - 22岁; N = 89）之间不相关声音对回忆表现的影响差异。需要连续排练的任务（序列和探索顺序回忆任务）与一个没有（缺失项目任务）在不相关的声音存在下，（重复的言语标记），变化状态（两个交替的语音标记），并且第一次使用子样本，也可以包含异常令牌（嵌入在序列中的男性语音令牌，否则以女性语音说话）。参与者要么完成任务，其中要记住的列表长度调整到个人数字跨度或固定在一个项目大于我们观察到的年龄组的平均跨度。在两种确定列表长度的方法中，无关声音的破坏性影响没有变化。我们发现，鼓励连续排练的任务特别受到两个年龄组的变化状态序列的影响（即，变化状态效应），并且在该效应方面没有组间差异。与此相反，由一个偏离的声音，通常被认为是注意力转移的结果中断是明显的儿童在所有三个任务，而成年人不太容易受到这种影响。这种模式的结果表明，分心的发展差异是由于注意力控制的差异，而不是串行排练效率。
Differences in the impact of irrelevant sound on recall performance in children (aged 7-9 years old; N = 89) compared to adults (aged 18-22 years old; N = 89) were examined. Tasks that required serial rehearsal (serial and probed-order recall tasks) were contrasted with one that did not (the missing-item task) in the presence of irrelevant sound that was either steady-state (a repeated speech token), changing-state (two alternating speech tokens) and, for the first time with a child sample, could also contain a deviant token (a male-voice token embedded in a sequence otherwise spoken in a female voice). Participants either completed tasks in which the to-be-remembered list-length was adjusted to individual digit span or was fixed at one item greater than the average span we observed for the age-group. The disruptive effects of irrelevant sound did not vary across the two methods of determining list-length. We found that tasks encouraging serial rehearsal were especially affected by changing-state sequences for both age-groups (i.e., the changing-state effect) and there were no group differences in relation to this effect. In contrast, disruption by a deviant sound-generally assumed to be the result of attentional diversion-was evident among children in all three tasks while adults were less susceptible to this effect. This pattern of results suggests that developmental differences in distraction are due to differences in attentional control rather than serial rehearsal efficiency.