Divided attention, selective attention and drawing: processing preferences in Williams syndrome are dependent on the task administered

The visuo-spatial abilities of individuals with Williams syndrome (WS) have consistently been shown to be generally weak. These poor visuo-spatial abilities have been ascribed to a local processing bias by some [R. Rossen, E.S. Klima, U. Bellugi, A. Bihrle, W. Jones, Interaction between language and cognition: evidence from Williams syndrome, in: J. Beitchman, N. Cohen, M. Konstantareas, R. Tannock (Eds.), Language, Learning and Behaviour disorders: Developmental, Behavioural and Clinical Perspectives, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1996, pp. 367-392] and conversely, to a global processing bias by others [Psychol. Sci. 10 (1999) 453]. In this study, two identification versions and one drawing version of the Navon hierarchical processing task, a non-verbal task, were employed to investigate this apparent contradiction. The two identification tasks were administered to 21 individuals with WS, 21 typically developing individuals, matched by non-verbal ability, and 21 adult participants matched to the WS group by mean chronological age (CA). The third, drawing task was administered to the WS group and the typically developing (TD) controls only. It was hypothesised that the WS group would show differential processing biases depending on the type of processing the task was measuring. Results from two identification versions of the Navon task measuring divided and selective attention showed that the WS group experienced equal interference from global to local as from local to global levels, and did not show an advantage of one level over another. This pattern of performance was broadly comparable to that of the control groups. The third task, a drawing version of the Navon task, revealed that individuals with WS were significantly better at drawing the local form in comparison to the global figure, whereas the typically developing control group did not show a bias towards either level. In summary, this study demonstrates that individuals with WS do not have a local or a global processing bias when asked to identify stimuli, but do show a local bias in their drawing abilities. This contrast may explain the apparently contrasting findings from previous studies. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Processing of faces and emotional expressions in infants at risk of social phobia

Individuals with social phobia display social information processing biases yet their aetiological significance is unclear. Infants of mothers with social phobia and control infants' responses were assessed at 10 days, 10 and 16 weeks, and 10 months to faces versus non-faces, variations in intensity of emotional expressions, and gaze direction. Infant temperament and maternal behaviours were also assessed. Both groups showed a preference for faces over non-faces at 10 days and 10 weeks, and full faces over profiles at 16 weeks; they also looked more to high vs. low intensity angry faces at 10 weeks, and fearful faces at 10 months; however, index infants' initial orientation and overall looking to high-intensity fear faces was relatively less than controls at 10 weeks. This was not explained by infant temperament or maternal behaviours. The findings suggest that offspring of mothers with social phobia show processing biases to emotional expressions in infancy.

Reverberant auditory environments: the effects of multiple echoes on distraction by 'irrelevant' speech

Two experiments examine the effect on an immediate recall test of simulating a reverberant auditory environment in which auditory distracters in the form of speech are played to the participants (the 'irrelevant sound effect'). An echo-intensive environment simulated by the addition of reverberation to the speech reduced the extent of 'changes in state' in the irrelevant speech stream by smoothing the profile of the waveform. In both experiments, the reverberant auditory environment produced significantly smaller irrelevant sound distraction effects than an echo-free environment. Results are interpreted in terms of changing-state hypothesis, which states that acoustic content of irrelevant sound, rather than phonology or semantics, determines the extent of the irrelevant sound effect (ISE). Copyright (C) 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

From dichotic listening to the irrelevant sound effect: a behavioural and neuroimaging analysis of the processing of unattended speech

The assumption that ignoring irrelevant sound in a serial recall situation is identical to ignoring a non-target channel in dichotic listening is challenged. Dichotic listening is open to moderating effects of working memory capacity (Conway et al., 2001) whereas irrelevant sound effects (ISE) are not (Beaman, 2004). A right ear processing bias is apparent in dichotic listening, whereas the bias is to the left ear in the ISE (Hadlington et al., 2004). Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging data (Scott et al., 2004, submitted) show bilateral activation of the superior temporal gyrus (STG) in the presence of intelligible, but ignored, background speech and right hemisphere activation of the STG in the presence of unintelligible background speech. It is suggested that the right STG may be involved in the ISE and a particularly strong left ear effect might occur because of the contralateral connections in audition. It is further suggested that left STG activity is associated with dichotic listening effects and may be influenced by working memory span capacity. The relationship of this functional and neuroanatomical model to known neural correlates of working memory is considered.

Auditory distraction from low-intensity noise: a review of the consequences for learning and workplace environments

The 'irrelevant sound effect' in short-term memory is commonly believed to entail a number of direct consequences for cognitive performance in the office and other workplaces (e.g. S. P. Banbury, S. Tremblay, W. J. Macken, & D. M. Jones, 2001). It may also help to identify what types of sound are most suitable as auditory warning signals. However, the conclusions drawn are based primarily upon evidence from a single task (serial recall) and a single population (young adults). This evidence is reconsidered from the standpoint of different worker populations confronted with common workplace tasks and auditory environments. Recommendations are put forward for factors to be considered when assessing the impact of auditory distraction in the workplace. Copyright (c) 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.