Memory as discrimination: what distraction reveals

Recalling information involves the process of discriminating between relevant and irrelevant information stored in memory. Not infrequently, the relevant information needs to be selected from amongst a series of related possibilities. This is likely to be particularly problematic when the irrelevant possibilities are not only temporally or contextually appropriate but also overlap semantically with the target or targets. Here, we investigate the extent to which purely perceptual features which discriminate between irrelevant and target material can be used to overcome the negative impact of contextual and semantic relatedness. Adopting a distraction paradigm, it is demonstrated that when distracters are interleaved with targets presented either visually (Experiment 1) or auditorily (Experiment 2), a within-modality semantic distraction effect occurs; semantically-related distracters impact upon recall more than unrelated distracters. In the semantically-related condition, the number of intrusions in recall is reduced whilst the number of correctly recalled targets is simultaneously increased by the presence of perceptual cues to relevance (color features in Experiment 1 or speaker’s gender in Experiment 2). However, as demonstrated in Experiment 3, even presenting semantically-related distracters in a language and a sensory modality (spoken Welsh) distinct from that of the targets (visual English) is insufficient to eliminate false recalls completely, or to restore correct recall to levels seen with unrelated distracters . Together, the study shows how semantic and non-semantic discriminability shape patterns of both erroneous and correct recall.

The effects of distraction on metacognition and metacognition on distraction: evidence from recognition memory

The effects of auditory distraction in memory tasks have been examined to date with procedures that minimize participants’ control over their own memory processes. Surprisingly little attention has been paid to metacognitive control factors which might affect memory performance. In this study, we investigate the effects of auditory distraction on metacognitive control of memory, examining the effects of auditory distraction in recognition tasks utilizing the metacognitive framework of Koriat and Goldsmith (1996), to determine whether strategic regulation of memory accuracy is impacted by auditory distraction. Results replicated previous findings in showing that auditory distraction impairs memory performance in tasks minimizing participants’ metacognitive control (forced-report test). However, the results revealed also that when metacognitive control is allowed (free-report tests), auditory distraction impacts upon a range of metacognitive indices. In the present study, auditory distraction undermined accuracy of metacognitive monitoring (resolution), reduced confidence in responses provided and, correspondingly, increased participants’ propensity to withhold responses in free-report recognition. Crucially, changes in metacognitive processes were related to impairment in free-report recognition performance, as the use of the ‘don’t know’ option under distraction led to a reduction in the number of correct responses volunteered in free-report tests. Overall, the present results show how auditory distraction exerts its influence on memory performance via both memory and metamemory processes.

Auditory distraction in memory tasks: Can it be controlled?

Irrelevant sound accompanying the processes of encoding and retrieval of verbal events impairs memory performance. However, the degree of impairment is highly dependent on a range of factors. Some of them lie outside rememberers’ control, like the semantic content of distracting sound or the nature of a test used to assess memory. Others, like a strategy used to encode memoranda, rest under control of the rememberer. In this paper the factors that modulate memory impairment are outlined and discussed in terms of multiple mechanisms contributing to memory impairment under auditory distraction. The mechanisms of a capture of attention by distraction, interference of automatic seriation of distraction and voluntary seriation of memoranda, semantic inhibition of distraction, and blocking of memoranda by semantically related distracters are described. Results that demonstrate how these mechanisms determine memory impairment under auditory distraction are also discussed. Particular attention is devoted to the possibility of voluntary control over the workings of these mechanisms and the conditions under which the negative impact of auditory distraction upon memory performance could be minimised.

Metacognitive control over memory processes under auditory distraction

Decades of research attest that memory processes suffer under conditions of auditory distraction. What is however less well understood is whether people are able to modify how their memory processes are deployed in order to compensate for disruptive effects of distraction. The metacognitive approach to memory describes a variety of ways people can exert control over their cognitive processes to optimize performance. Here we describe our recent investigations into how these control processes change under conditions of auditory distraction. We specifically looked at control of encoding in the form of decisions about how long to study a word when it is presented and control of memory reporting in the form of decisions whether to volunteer or withhold retrieved details. Regarding control of encoding, we expected that people would compensate for disruptive effects of distraction by extending study time under noise. Our results revealed, however, that when exposed to irrelevant speech, people curtail rather than extend study. Regarding control of memory reporting, we expected that people would compensate for the loss of access to memory records by volunteering responses held with lower confidence. Our results revealed, however, that people’s reporting strategies do not differ when memory task is performed in silence or under auditory distraction, although distraction seriously undermines people’s confidence in their own responses. Together, our studies reveal novel avenues for investigating the psychological effects of auditory distraction within a metacognitive framework.