Abstract:Two types of disruptive effects of irrelevant sound on visual tasks have been reported: the changing-state effect and the deviation effect. The idea that the deviation effect, which arises from attentional capture, is independent of task requirements, whereas the changing-state effect is specific to tasks that require serial processing, has been examined by comparing tasks that do or do not require serial-order processing. While many previous studies used the missing-item task as the nonserial task, it is unclear whether other cognitive tasks lead to similar results regarding the different task specificity of both effects. Kattner et al . ( Memory and Cognition , 2023) used the mental-arithmetic task as the nonserial task, and failed to demonstrate the deviation effect. However, there were several procedural factors that could account for the lack of deviation effect, such as differences in design and procedures (e.g., conducted online, intermixed conditions). In the present study, we aimed to investigate whether the deviation effect could be observed in both the serial-recall and mental-arithmetic tasks when these procedural factors were modified. We found strong evidence of the deviation effect in both the serial-recall and the mental-arithmetic tasks when stimulus presentation and experimental design were aligned with previous studies that demonstrated the deviation effect (e.g., conducted in-person, blockwise presentation of sound, etc.). The results support the idea that the deviation effect is not task-specific. Two types of disruptive effects of irrelevant sound on visual tasks have been reported: the changing-state effect and the deviation effect. The idea that the deviation effect, which arises from attentional capture, is independent of task requirements, whereas the changing-state effect is specific to tasks that require serial processing, has been examined by comparing tasks that do or do not require serial-order processing. While many previous studies used the missing-item task as the nonserial task, it is unclear whether other cognitive tasks lead to similar results regarding the different task specificity of both effects. Kattner et al . ( Memory and Cognition , 2023) used the mental-arithmetic task as the nonserial task, and failed to demonstrate the deviation effect. However, there were several procedural factors that could account for the lack of deviation effect, such as differences in design and procedures (e.g., conducted online, intermixed conditions). In the present study, we aimed to investigate whether the deviation effect could be observed in both the serial-recall and mental-arithmetic tasks when these procedural factors were modified. We found strong evidence of the deviation effect in both the serial-recall and the mental-arithmetic tasks when stimulus presentation and experimental design were aligned with previous studies that demonstrated the deviation effect (e.g., conducted in-person, blockwise presentation of sound, etc.). The results support the idea that the deviation effect is not task-specific.

Dissociating Two Forms of Auditory Distraction in a Novel Stroop Serial Recall Experiment

Attentional control and metacognitive monitoring of the effects of different types of task-irrelevant sound on serial recall.

Dissociated roles of the parietal and frontal cortices in the scope and control of attention during visual working memory.

The Influence Of Stimulant Material Category On The Stroop Dilution Effect

Replicating and extending hemispheric asymmetries in auditory distraction: no metacognitive awareness for the left-ear disadvantage for changing-state sounds

When is forewarned forearmed? Predicting auditory distraction in short-term memory.

Distraction by Auditory Categorical Deviations Is Unrelated to Working Memory Capacity: Further Evidence of a Distinction between Acoustic and Categorical Deviation Effects

Revisiting the Deviation Effects of Irrelevant Sound on Serial and Nonserial Tasks

Auditory context-dependent distraction by unexpected visual stimuli

Inhibitory modulation of speech trajectories: Evidence from a vowel-modified Stroop task

Distraction by deviant sounds during reading: An eye-movement study

Distraction by auditory novelty during reading: Evidence for disruption in saccade planning, but not saccade execution

Priming the distractor can eliminate the Stroop interference effect

Disruption of visual short-term memory by changing-state auditory stimuli: The role of segmentation

The surprising robustness of visual search against concurrent auditory distraction.

Auditory distraction during reading: Investigating the effects of background sounds on parafoveal processing

Effects of auditory and tactile distraction in adults with low and high ADHD symptoms

Dissociating proactive and reactive control in the Stroop task

When long appears short: Effects of auditory distraction on event‐related potential correlates of time perception

Response Modality and the Stroop Task

Different types of semantic interference, same lapses of attention: Evidence from Stroop tasks