LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Languages: English
Types: Doctoral thesis
Subjects:

Classified by OpenAIRE into

ACM Ref: TheoryofComputation_LOGICSANDMEANINGSOFPROGRAMS
The present thesis examined whether the interference-by-process construct, as applied to auditory distraction during visual-verbal serial recall (the irrelevant sound effect, ISE), also holds as a useful framework for interpreting auditory-semantic distraction whereby performance on tasks requiring semantic focal processes is disrupted by the semantic properties of irrelevant sound. To address this goal, several semantic focal tasks were used in conjunction with manipulations of task-instruction and of the semantic properties of irrelevant sounds. Empirical Series 1 showed that episodic recall of lists comprising exemplars drawn from a single semantic-category was disrupted by the lexicality of the irrelevant items and their semantic similarity to the to-be-remembered exemplars, but only when the task-instructions emphasised free, not serial, recall and when the irrelevant category items were dominant exemplars of a category. Moreover this series also demonstrated that irrelevant category items are often included erroneously as responses, and that this is due to a breakdown in the source-monitoring process. These results provide evidence for the interference-by-process construct in that the semantic properties of speech disrupt semantic, and source-monitoring, processing in the focal task and may also produce interference through giving rise to inhibitory processes. Series 2 showed that the presence of semantic properties in the irrelevant sound impaired semantic categorization (or category-clustering) and category, and category-exemplar, recall in the episodic recall of lists of exemplars drawn from several semantic categories, but, like Series 1, failed to produce disruption when task-instruction demanded serial recall. This finding provides yet further evidence for a conflict between two semantic processes. Finally, Series 3 showed that the semantic, but not acoustic, properties of irrelevant sound impaired retrieval from semantic memory when the focal task required retrieval from a semantic-category (requiring semantic processing), but not phonemic-category (not necessitating semantic processing). The implications of the findings for other approaches to auditory-semantic distraction, and auditory distraction generally, are discussed.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Marsh, J. E., Banbury, S. P., & Jones, D. M. (June, 2005). Impairment of categoryexemplar retrieval by auditory distraction: Semantic and episodic factors, y 1 European Congress o f Psychology, Granada, Spain.
    • Marsh, J. E., Hughes, R. W., & Jones, D. M. (April, 2006). Distraction in semantic memory from irrelevant auditory material: Inhibition, activation, and failure of sourcemonitoring. Experimental Psychological Society (EPS) Conference, Birmingham, UK.
    • Marsh, J. E., Banbury, S. P., & Jones, D. M. (September, 2004). When irrelevant sound fails to disrupt free recall: The case of categorized word lists. British Psychological Society (BPS) Conference (Cognitive Section), Leeds, UK.
    • Frankel, F., & Cole, M. (1971). Measures of category clustering in free recall. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 39-44.
    • Freebume, C. M., & Fleischer, M. (1952). The effect of music distraction upon reading rate and comprehension. Journal o f Educational Psychology, 43, 101-109.
    • Fu, C. H. Y., Morgan, K., Suckling, J., Williams, S. C. R., Andrew, C., Vythelingum, G. N. et al. (2002). A functional magnetic resonance imaging study of overt letter verbal fluency using a clustered acquisition sequence: Greater anterior cingulated activation with increased task demand. Neuroimage, 17, 871-879.
    • Fumham, A., & Allass, K. (1999). The influence of musical distraction of varying complexity on the cognitive performance of extraverts and introverts. European Journal o f Personality, 13, 27-38.
    • Fumham, A., & Bradley, A. (1997). Music while you work: The differential distraction of background music on the cognitive test performance of introverts and extraverts. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11, 445-455.
    • Fumham, A. & Stanley, A. (2003). The influence of vocal and instrumental background music on the cognitive performance o f introverts and extraverts. In S. Shohov (Ed.), Topics in Cognitive Psychology (pp. 151-167). New York: Nova.
    • Fumham, A., & Strbac, L. (2002). Music is as distracting as noise: The differential distraction of background music and noise on the cognitive test performance of introverts and extraverts. Ergonomics, 45, 203-217.
    • Fumham, A., Trew, S., & Sneade, I. (1999). The distracting effects of vocal and instrumental music on the cognitive test performance of introverts and extraverts. Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 381-392.
    • Gallo, D. A., McDermott, K. B., Percer, J. M., & Roediger, H. L. III. (2001). Modality effects in false recall and false recognition. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 339-353.
    • Gallo, D.A. & Roediger, H.L. III. (2002). Variability among word lists in eliciting memory illusions: Evidence for associative activation and monitoring. Journal o f Memory and Language, 47, 469-497.
    • Gardiner, J. M. (1988). Functional aspects of recollective experience. Memory and Cognition, 16, 309-313.
    • Gardiner, J. M., Gawlick, B., & Richardson-Klavehn, A. (1994). Maintenance rehearsal affects knowing, not remembering, elaborative rehearsal affects remembering, not knowing. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 1, 107-110.
    • Gardiner, J. M. & Java, R. I. (1993). Recognizing and remembering. In A. Collins, M. A. Conway, S. E. Gathercole & P. E. Morris (Eds.), Theories o f memory (pp. 163-188). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    • Gardiner, J. M., Passmore, C., Herriot, P., & Klee, H. (1977). Memory for remembered events: Effects of response mode and response-produced feedback. Journal o f Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 45-54.
    • Gathercole, S. E., & Baddeley, A. D. (1993). Working memory and language. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    • Geringer, J. M. & Nelson, J. (1979). Effects of background music on musical task performance and subsequent preference. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 49, 39-45.
    • Gerkens, D. R., & Smith, S. M. (2004). Effects of perceptual modality on verbatim and gist memory. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 11, 143-149.
    • Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, Houghton Mifflin.
    • Gillund, G., & Shffrin, R. M. (1984). A retrieval model for both recognition and recall. Psychological Review, 91, 1-67.
    • Glanzer, M. (1972). Storage mechanisms in recall. In K. W. Spence & J. T. Spence (Eds.), The psychology o f learning and motivation (Vol. 5, pp. 129-193). New York: Academic Press.
    • Glanzer, M., & Cunitz, A. R. (1966). Two storage mechanisms in free recall. Journal o f Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 5, 351-360.
    • Glass, A. L., & Holyoak, F. J. (1986). Cognition (2nd ed.). New York: Random House.
    • Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R. I., & Werner, G. A. (2002). Semantic and letter fluency in Spanish-English bilinguals. Neuropsychology, 16, 562-576.
    • Graesser, A., & Mandler, G. (1978). Limited processing capacity constrains the storage of unrelated sets of words and retrieval from natural categories. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4, 86-100.
    • Graf, P., Shimamura, A. P., & Squire, L. R. (1985). Priming across modalities and priming across category levels: Extending the domain of preserved function in amnesia. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 386-396.
    • Grande, L., McGlinchey-Berroth, R., Milberg, W. P., & D'Esposito, M. (1996). Facilitation of unattended semantic information in Alzheimer's disease: Evidence from a selective attention task. Neuropsychology, 10, 475-484.
    • Graydon, J., & Eysenck, M. W. (1989). Distraction and cognitive performance. European Journal o f Cognitive Psychology, 1, 161-179.
    • Greitzer, F. L. (1976). Intracategory rehearsal in list learning. Journal o f Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 641-654.
    • Grober, E., Buschke, H., Kawas, C., & Fuld, P. (1985). Impaired ranking of semantic attributes in dementia. Brain and Language, 26, 276-286.
    • Gronlund, S., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1986). Retrieval strategies in recall of natural categories and categorized lists. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12, 550-561.
    • Gruenewald, P. J., & Lockhead, G. R. (1980). The free recall of category examples. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 225-240.
    • Haarmann H. & Usher M. (2001). Maintenance o f semantic information in capacity limited short-term memory. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 8, 568-578.
    • Hadlington, L. J., Bridges, A. M., & Beaman, C. P. (2006). A left-ear disadvantage for the presentation of irrelevant sound: Manipulations of task requirements and changing state. Brain and Cognition, 61, 159-171.
    • Hall, J. C. (1952). The effect o f background music on the reading comprehension of 278 8th and 9th grade students. Journal o f Educational Research, 45, 451-458.
    • Hanauer, J. B., & Brooks, P. J. (2003). Developmental changes in the cross-modal Stroop effect. Perception and Psychophysics, 65, 359-366.
    • Hanley, J. R., & Bakopoulou, E. (2003). Irrelevant speech, articulatory suppression, and phonological similarity: A test o f the phonological loop model of the feature model. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10, 435-444.
    • Heath, A. J., Aldridge, R., Butroid, P., Carr, P., Clarke, L., & Fairhurst, G. (2004). Picture imperfect? Imagery andfalse recall o f word lists. Paper presented at the BPS Cognitive Psychology Conference, Leeds, UK.
    • HellbrUck, J., Kuwano, S. & Namba, S. (1996). Irrelevant background speech and human performance. Is there long-term habituation? Journal o f the Acoustical Society o f Japan, 17, 239-247.
    • Henderson, M.T., Crews, A., & Barlow, J. (1945). A study of the effect of music distraction on reading efficiency. Journal o fApplied Psychology, 29, 313-317.
    • Henkel, L. A., & Franklin, N. (1998). Reality monitoring of physically similar and conceptually related objects. Memory and Cognition, 26, 659-673.
    • Henkel, L. A., Franklin, N., & Johnson, M. K. (2000). Cross-modal source-monitoring confusions between perceived and imagined events. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 321-335.
    • Henkel, L. A., Johnson, M. K., & De Leonardis, D. M. (1998). Aging and source monitoring: Cognitive processes and neuropsychological correlates. Journal o f Experimental Psychology'. General, 127, 251-268.
    • Henry, J. D., & Crawford, J. R. (2004). A meta-analytic review of verbal fluency performance following focal cortical lesions. Neuropsychology, 1 8 ,284-295.
    • Henry, J. D., Crawford, J. R., & Phillips, L. H. (2004). Verbal fluency performance in dementia of the Alzheimer's type: A meta-analysis. Neuropsychologia, 2 7 ,1-24.
    • Henson, R. N. A. (1998). Short-Term Memory for Serial Order: The Start-End Model. Cognitive Psychology, 36, 73-137.
    • Henson R. N. A., Hartley T., Burgess N., Hitch G. J., Flude, B. (2003) Selective interference with verbal short-term memory for serial order information: a new paradigm and tests of a timing signal hypothesis. Quarterly Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 56, 1307-1334.
    • Herrmann, M., Rotte, M., Grubich, C., Ebert, A. D., Schiltz, K., Munte, T. F., & Heinze, H. J. (2001). Control of semantic interference in episodic memory retrieval is associated with an anterior cingulated-prefrontal activation pattern. Human Brain Mapping, 12, 94-103.
    • Hicks, J. L., & Hancock, T. W. (2002). Backward associative strength determines source attributions given to false memories. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9, 807-815.
    • Hicks, J. L., & Marsh, R. L. (1999). Attempts to reduce the incidence of false recall with source monitoring. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 1195-1209.
    • Hicks, J. L., & Marsh, R. L. (2001). False recognition occurs more frequently during source identification than during old-new recognition. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 375-383.
    • Hilliard, O. M., Tolin, P. (1979). Effects of familiarity with background music on performance of simple and difficult reading comprehension. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 49, 713-714.
    • Hodges, J. R., Salmon, D. P., & Butters, N. (1990). Differential impairment of semantic and episodic memory in Alzheimer's and Huntington's diseases: A controlled prospective study. Journal o f Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 53, 1089-1095.
    • Holender, D. (1986). Semantic activation without conscious identification in dichotic listening, parafoveal vision, and visual masking: A survey and appraisal. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 9, 1-23.
    • Hommel, B., Musseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 849-878.
    • Houghton, G., & Tipper, S. P. (1994). A model of inhibitory mechanisms in selective attention. In A. Dagenbach & T. Carr (Eds.), Inhibitory mechanisms in attention, memory, and language (pp. 53-111). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
    • Howard, M. W., & Kahana, M. J. (2002). When does semantic similarity help episodic retrieval? Journal o f Memory and Language, 46, 85-98.
    • Hudson, R. L., & Dunn, J. E. (1969). A major modification of the Bousfield (1966) measure of category clustering. Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation, 7, 110- 111.
    • Hughes, R. W., & Jones, D. M. (2001). The intrusiveness of sound: Laboratory findings and their implications for noise abatement. Noise and Health, IS, 51-70.
    • Hughes, R. W., & Jones, D. M. (2003a). A negative order-repetition priming effect: Inhibition of order in unattended auditory sequences? Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 199-218.
    • Hughes, R. W., & Jones, D. M. (2003b). Indispensable benefits and unavoidable costs of unattended sound for cognitive functioning. Noise and Health, 6, 63-76.
    • Hughes, R. W., & Jones, D. M. (2005). The impact of order incongruence between a task-irrelevant auditory sequence and a task-relevant visual sequence. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 316-327.
    • Hughes, R. W., Tremblay, S., & Jones, D. M. (2005). Disruption by speech of serial short-term memory: The role of changing-state vowels. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 12, 886-890.
    • Hughes, R. W., Vachon, F., & Jones, D. M. (2005). Auditory attentional capture during serial recall: Violations at encoding of an algorithm-based neural model? Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 31, 736- 749.
    • Hughes, R. W., Vachon, F., Linsmith, G., & Jones, D. M. (2006). Auditory distraction: A unitary phenomenon? Manuscript submitted for publication.
    • Humphreys, M. S., Bain, J. D., & Pike, R. (1989). Different ways to cue a coherent memory system: A theory for episodic, semantic and procedural tasks. Psychological Review, 96, 208-233.
    • Hunt, R. R., & McDaniel, M. A. (1993). The enigma of organization and distinctiveness. Journal o f Memory and Language, 32, 421-445.
    • Hunt, R. R., & Seta, C. E. (1984). Category size effects in recall: The roles of relational and individual item information. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 454-464.
    • Hutchinson, K. A. (2002). The effect of asymmetrical association on positive and negative semantic priming. Memory and Cognition, 30, 1263-1276.
    • Hutchinson, K. A. (2003). Is semantic priming due to association strength or feature overlap? A w/croanalytic review. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10, 785-813.
    • Hygge, S., Boman, E., & Enmarker, I. (2003). The effects o f road traffic noise and meaningful irrelevant speech on different memory systems. Scandinavian Journal o f Psychology, 4 4 ,13-21.
    • Indow, T., & Togano, K. (1970). On retrieving sequence from long-term memory. Psychological Review, 77, 317-331.
    • Jacoby, L. L. (1991). A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory. Journal o f Memory and Language, 30, 513-541.
    • James, W. (1890). The principles o fpsychology. New York: Holt.
    • Janssen, N., Schirm, W., Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2006). The semantic interference effect in the picture-word interference paradigm: Evidence fo r the response selection hypothesis. Manuscript submitted for publication.
    • Jenkins, J. J., & Russell, W. A. (1952). Associative clustering during recall. Journal o f Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 818-821.
    • Jescheniak, J.D., & Schriefers, H.J. (2001). Priming effects from phonologically related distractors in picture word interference. Quarterly Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 54A, 2, 371-382.
    • Joanette, Y., & Goulet, P. (1986). Criterion-specific reduction in right brain-damaged right-handers. Neuropsychologia, 24, 875-879.
    • Johnson, S. K., & Anderson, M. C. (2004). The role of inhibitory control in forgetting semantic knowledge. Psychological Science, 15, 448-453.
    • Johnson, M. K., Foley, M. A., & Leach, K. (1988). The consequences for memory of imagining in another person's voice. Memory and Cognition, 16, 337-342.
    • Johnson, M. K., Hashtroudi, S., & Lindsay, D. S. (1993). Source monitoring. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 3-28.
    • Johnson, M. K., & Hirst, W. (1991). Processing subsystems of memory. In R. G. Lister & H. J. Weingartner (Eds.), Perspectives on cognitive neuroscience (pp. 197-217). New York: Oxford University Press.
    • Johnson, M. K., & Raye, C. L. (1981). Reality monitoring. Psychological Review, 88, 67-85.
    • Johnson, M. K., Raye, C. L., & Durso, F. T. (1980). Reality monitoring: Second perceptions and thoughts. Bulletin o f the Psychonomic Society, 15 ,402-404.
    • Johnson, M. K., Raye, C. L., Foley, H. J., & Foley, M. A. (1981). Cognitive operations and decision bias in reality monitoring. American Journal o f Psychology, 94, 37-64.
    • Jones, D. M. (1993). Objects, streams and threads of auditory attention. In A. D. Baddeley & L. Weiskrantz (Eds.), Attention: Selection, awareness and control, (pp. 167-198). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    • Jones, D. M. (1994). Disruption of memory for lip-read lists by irrelevant speech: Further support for the changing-state hypothesis. Quarterly Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 47A, 143-160.
    • Jones, D. M. (1999). The cognitive psychology of auditory distraction: The 1997 BPS Broadbent Lecture. British Journal o f Psychology, 90, 167-187.
    • Jones, D. M., Alford, D., Bridges, A., Tremblay, S., & Macken, W. J. (1999). Organizational factors in selective attention: The interplay of acoustic distinctiveness and auditory streaming in the irrelevant sound effect. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 464-473.
    • Jones, D. M., Beaman, C. P., & Macken, W. J. (1996). The object-oriented episodic record model. In S. Gathercole (Ed.), Models o f short-term memory (pp. 209-238). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    • Jones, D. M., Farrand, P. A., Stuart, G. P., & Morris, N. (1995). The functional equivalence of verbal and spatial information in short-term memory. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 1008-1018.
    • Jones, D. M., & Macken, W. J. (1993). Irrelevant tones produce an irrelevant speech effect: Implications for phonological coding in working memory. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 369-381.
    • Jones, D. M., & Macken, W. J. (1995a). Phonological similarity in the irrelevant speech effect: Within- or between-stream similarity? Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 103-115.
    • Jones, D. M., & Macken, W. J. (1995b). Auditory babble and cognitive efficiency: Role of number of voices and their location. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1,216-226.
    • Jones, D. M., & Macken, W. J. (1995c). Organizational factors in the effect of irrelevant speech: The role o f spatial location and timing. Memory and Cognition, 21, 318-328.
    • Jones, D. M., Hughes, R. W., & Macken, W. J. (2006). Perceptual organization masquerading as phonological storage: Further support for a perceptual-gestural view of short-term memory. Journal o f Memory and Language, 54, 265-281.
    • Jones, D. M., Macken, W. J., & Mosdell, N. (1997). The role o f habituation in the disruption of recall performance by irrelevant sound. British Journal o f Psychology, 88, 549-564.
    • Jones, D. M., Macken, W. J., & Murray, A. C. (1993). Disruption of visual short-term memory by changing-state auditory stimuli: The role o f segmentation. Memory and Cognition, 21, 318-328.
    • Jones, D. M., Macken, W. J., & Nicholls, A. P. (2004). The phonological store of working memory: Is it phonological and is it a store? Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 656-674.
    • Jones, D. M., Madden, C., & Miles, C. (1992). Privileged access by irrelevant speech to short-term memory: The role o f changing state. Quarterly Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 44A, 645-669.
    • Jones, D. M., Miles, C., & Page, J. (1990). Disruption of proof-reading by irrelevant speech: Effects of attention, arousal or memory? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 4, 89- 108.
    • Jones, D. M., Saint-Aubin, J., & Tremblay, S. (1999). Modulation of the irrelevant sound effect by organizational factors: Further evidence from streaming by location. Quarterly Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 52A, 545-554.
    • Jones, D. M., & Tremblay, S. (2000). Interference by process or content? A reply to Neath (2000). Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 7, 550-558.
    • Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and Effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    • Kaltsounis, B. (1973). Effects o f sound on creative performance. Psychological Reports, 33, 737-738.
    • Kane, M. J., & Engle, R. W. (2000). Working-memory capacity, proactive interference, and divided attention: Limits on long-term memory retrieval. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 26, 336-58.
    • Kane, M. J., Bleckley, M. K., Conway, A. R. A., & Engle, R. W. (2001). A controlledattention view of working memory capacity: Individual differences in memory span and the control of visual orienting. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 169-183.
    • Kane, M. J., Hambrick, D. Z., Tuholski, S. W., Wilhelm, O., Payne, T. W., & Engle, R. W. (2004). The generality o f working memory capacity: A latent variable approach to verbal and visuospatial memory span and reasoning. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 189-217.
    • Kelley, C. M., & Jacoby, L. L. (1998). Subjective reports and process dissociation: Fluency, knowing, and feeling. Acta Psychologica, 98, 127-140.
    • Kellogg, R. T. (2001). Presentation modality and mode of recall in verbal false memory. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 913-919.
    • Kiger, D. M. (1989). Effects o f music information load on a reading comprehension task. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 69, 531-534.
    • Kilcher, H., & Hellbriick, J. (1993). The irrelevant speech effect: Is binaural processing relevant or irrelevant? In M. Vallet (Ed.), Noise & man '93 (pp. 323-328). Arcueil, France: Institut National de Recherche sur les Transports et Leur Securite.
    • Kimball, D. R., & Bjork, R. A. (2002). Influences o f intention and unintentional forgetting on false memories. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 116-130.
    • Kintsch, W. (1970). Models for free recall and recognition. In D. A. Norman (Ed.). Models o f human memory (pp. 331-373). New York: Academic Press.
    • Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension constructionintegration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163-182.
    • Klatte, M., & Hellbriick, J. (1993). Der "irrelevant speech effect": Wirkungen von hintergrundschall auf das arbeitsgedachtnis. Zeitschriftfu r Ldrmbekampfung, 40, 91- 98.
    • Klatte, M., Kilcher, H., & Hellbriick, J. (1995). Auditive Wahmehmung und Arbeitsgedachtnis: Auftretensbedingungen des "Irrelevant Speech"-Effekts. In: Giintiirkun, O., Guski, R., Walter, C.; Wohlschlager, A. (Eds.), Experim ented Psychologie (S. 195). Regensburg: Roderer.
    • Knez, I., & Hygge, S. (2002). Effects of Noise and Indoor Lighting on Cognitive Performance and self-reported affect. Journal o f Environmental Psychology, 21, 291-299.
    • Kolers, P. A., & Roediger, H. L. III. (1984). Procedures of mind. Journal o f Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 425-449.
    • Kriegstein, K., Eger, E., Kleinschmidt, A., & Giraud, A. L. (2003). Modulation of neural responses to speech by directing attention to voices or verbal content. Cognitive Brain Research, 17, 48-55.
    • Kurtz, K. J., & Gentner, D. (2006). Kinds of kinds: Sources o f category coherence. Proceedings o f the 23rd Annual Conference o f the Cognitive Science Society.
    • La Heij, W., Kuipers, J. R., & Starreveld, P. A. (2006). In defence of the lexicalcompetition account of picture-word interference: A comment on Finkbeiner and Caramazza. Cortex. Manuscript in press.
    • Lachter, J., Forster, K. I., & Ruthruff, E. (2004). Forty-five years after Broadbent (1958): Still no identification without attention. Psychological Review, 111, 880- 913.
    • Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato's problem: The latent semantic analysis theory o f the acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104, 211-240.
    • Larsen, A., Mcllhagga, W., Baert, J., & Bundesen, C. (2003). Seeing or hearing? Perceptual interference, modality confusions, and cross-modal congruity effects with focused and divided attention. Perception and Psychophysics, 64, 568-574.
    • Larsen, J. & Baddeley, A. D. (2003). Disruption of verbal STM by irrelevant speech, articulatory suppression and manual tapping: Do they have a common source? Quarterly Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 56A, 1249-1268.
    • Larsen, J. D., Baddeley, A. D., & Andrade, J. (2000). Phonological similarity and the irrelevant speech effect: Implications for models of short-term verbal memory. Memory, 8, 145-157.
    • Lavie, N. (1995). Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 451-468.
    • Lavie, N. (2000). Selective attention and cognitive control: Dissociating attentional functions through different types of load. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Attention and performance XVIII, (pp. 175-197). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    • LeCompte, D. C. (1994). Extending the irrelevant speech effect beyond serial recall. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 1396- 1408.
    • LeCompte, D. C. (1996). Irrelevant speech, serial rehearsal, and temporal distinctiveness: A new approach to the irrelevant speech effect. Journal o f Experimental Psychology'. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1154-1165.
    • LeCompte, D. C., & Shaibe, D. M. (1997). On the irrelevance of phonological similarity to the irrelevant speech effect. Quarterly Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 50A, 100-118.
    • Lee, C. L., & Estes, W. K. (1977). Order and position in primary memory for letter strings. Journal o f Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 395-418.
    • Lee, C. L., & Estes, W. K. (1981). Item and order information in short-term memory: Evidence for multilevel perturbation processes. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 7, 149-169.
    • Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1-38.
    • Lindsay, D. S., & Johnson, M. K. (2000). False memories and the source monitoring framework: Reply to Reyna and Lloyd (1997). Learning and Individual Differences, 12, 145-161.
    • Lindsay, D. S., Johnson, M. K., & Kwon, P. (1991). Developmental changes in memory source monitoring. Journal o f Experimental Child Psychology, 52, 297-318.
    • Luce, P. A., & Pisoni, D. B. (1998). Recognizing spoken words: The neighborhood activation model. Ear and Hearing, 19, 1-36.
    • Lund, K., & Burgess, C. (1996). Producing high-dimensional semantic spaces from lexical co-occurrence. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 28, 203-208.
    • Lupiaflez, J., Rueda, M. R., Ruz, M., & Tudela, P. (2000). Processing of attended and ignored words in the parafovea: Inhibitory aspects of semantic processing. Psicologica, 21, 233-257.
    • Macken, W. J., & Jones, D. M. (1995). Functional characteristics of the inner voice and the inner ear. Journal o f Experimental Psychology'. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 436-448.
    • Macken, W. J., Mosdell, N., & Jones, D. M. (1999). Explaining the ISE: Temporal distinctiveness or changing state? Journal o f Experimental Psychology.' Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 810-814.
    • Macken, W. J., Phelps, F., & Jones, D. M. (2006). What causes auditory distraction? Manuscript submitted for publication.
    • Macken, W. J., Tremblay, S., Alford, D., & Jones, D. M. (1999). Attentional selectivity in short-term memory: Similarity o f process, not similarity of content determines disruption. International Journal o f Psychology, 34, 322-321.
    • Macken, W. J., Tremblay, S., Houghton, R. J., Nicholls, A. P., & Jones, D. M. (2003). Does auditory streaming require attention? Evidence from attentional selectivity in short-term memory. Journal o f Experimental Psychology'. Human Perception and Performance, 2 9 ,43-51.
    • Mandler, G. (1969). Input variables and output strategies in the free recall of categorized lists. American Journal o f Psychology, 82, 531 -539.
    • Mather, M., Johnson, M. K., & De Leonardis, D. (1999). Stereotype reliance in source monitoring: Age differences and neuropsychological test correlates. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 16, 437-458.
    • Marsh, E. J., & Bower, G. H. (2004). The role o f rehearsal and generation in false memory creation. Memory, 12, 748-761.
    • Marsh, J. E., & Jones, D. M. (March, 2006). A between-sequence phonological similarity effect in the free recall of end-rhyme category lists. British Psychological Society (BPS) Annual Conference, Cardiff, UK.
    • Marsh, J. E., Hodgetts, H. M., & Jones, D. M. (November, 2006). Distraction within- and between-modalities: Semantic and perceptual determinants. 47thAnnual Meeting o f the Psychonomic Society, Houston, Texas.
    • Marsh, R. L. & Landau, J. D. (1995). Item availability in cryptomnesia: Assessing its role in two paradigms of unconscious plagiarism. Journal o f Experimental Psychology'.Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 1568-1582.
    • Marsh, R. L., Landau, J. D., & Hicks, J. L. (1997). Contribution of inadequate source monitoring to unconscious plagiarism during idea generation. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 886-897.
    • Martin, A., Wiggs, C. L., Lalonde, F., & Mack, C. (1994). Word retrieval to letter and semantic cues: A double dissociation in normal subjects using interference tasks. Neuropsychologia, 32, 1487-1442.
    • Martin, R. C., Wogalter, M. S., & Forlano, J. G. (1988). Reading comprehension in the presence of unattended speech and music. Journal o f Memory and Language, 27, 382-398.
    • Martin-Loeches, M., Schweinberger, S. R., & Sommer, W. (1997). The phonological loop model of working memory: An ERP study of irrelevant speech and phonological similarity effects. Memory and Cognition, 27, 471-483.
    • Martindale, C. (1981). Cognition and consciousness. Homewood III: Dorsey Press.
    • Masson, M. E. J. (1995). A distributed model of semantic priming. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 3-23.
    • Mather, M., Henkel, L. A., & Johnson, M. K. (1997). Evaluating characteristics of false memories: Remember/Know judgments and memory characteristics questionnaire compared. Memory and Cognition, 25, 826-837.
    • Maylor, E. A., & Mo, A. (1999). Effects o f study-test modality on false recognition. British Journal o f Psychology, 90, 477-493.
    • Mayr, U. (2002). On the dissociation between clustering and switching in verbal fluency: comment on Troyer, Moscovitch, Winocur, Alexander and Stuss. Neuropsychologia, 40, 562-566.
    • Mayr, U., & Kiegel, R. (2000). Complex semantic processing and old age: does it stay or does it go? Psychology and Aging, 15, 29-34.
    • McCabe, D. P., Presmanes, A. L., Robertson, C. L., & Smith, A. D. (2004). Itemspecific processing reduces false memories. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 11, 1074-1079.
    • McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1987). A distributed model of human learning and memory. In J. L. McClelland & D. E. Rumelhart (Eds.). Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure o f cognition (pp. 170-215). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
    • McDermott, K. B. (1996). The persistence o f false memories in list recall. Journal o f Memory and Language, 35, 212-230.
    • McDermott, K.B. & Roediger, H.L. (1998). Attempting to avoid illusory memories: Robust false recognition of associates persists under conditions of explicit warnings and immediate testing. Journal o f Memory and Language, 39, 508-520.
    • McDermott, K. B., & Watson, J. M. (2001). The rise and fall of false recall: The impact of presentation duration. Journal o f Memory and Language, 45, 160-176.
    • McGeoch, J. A. (1942). The psychology o f human learning. New York: Longmans, Green.
    • Mensink, J. G., & Raaijmakers, J. G. W. (1988). A model of interference and forgetting. Psychological Review, 95, 434-455.
    • Meyer, A. S., & Schriefers, H. (1991). Phonological facilitation in picture-word interference experiments: Effects of stimulus onset asynchrony and types of interfering stimuli. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 1146-1160.
    • Meyer, A. S., & van der Meulen, F. F. (2000). Phonological priming effects on speech onset latencies and viewing times in object naming. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 7,314-319.
    • Miles, C., & Jones, D. M. (1989). The fallacy of the cross-modal Stroop effect: A rejoinder to Cowan (1989). Perception and Psychophysics, 45, 85-86.
    • Miles, C., Jones, D. M., & Madden, C. A. (1991). Locus o f the irrelevant speech effect in short-term memory. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 578-584.
    • Miles, C., Madden, C., & Jones, D. M. (1989). Cross-modal auditory-visual Stroop interference: A reply to Cowan and Barron (1987). Perception and Psychophysics, 45, 77-81.
    • Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity to process information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.
    • Miller, L. K., & Schyb, M. (1989). Facilitation and interference by background music. Journal o f Music Therapy, 26, 42-54.
    • Milner, B. (1995). Aspects of human frontal lobe function. In H. H. Jasper, S. Riggio, & P. S. Goldman-Rakic (Eds.). Epilepsy and the functional anatomy of the frontal lobe (pp. 67-94). New York: Raven Press.
    • Miozzo, M., & Caramazza, A. (2003). When more is less: A counterintuitive effect of distractor frequency in the picture-word interference paradigm. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 228-252.
    • Mondor, T. A., & Terrio, N. A. (1998). Mechanisms of perceptual organization and auditory selective attention: The role of pattern structure. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1628-1641.
    • Monsch, A. U., Bondi, M. W., Butters, N., Paulsen, J. S., Salmon, D. P., Brugger, P., & Swenson, M. R. (1994). A comparison o f category and letter fluency in Alzheimer's disease and Huntington's disease. Neuropsychology, 8, 25-30.
    • Monsch, A. U., Bondi, M. W., Butters, N., Salmon, D. P., Katzman, R., & Thai, L. J. (1992). Comparisons of verbal fluency tasks in the detection of dementia of the Alzheimer type. Archives o fNeurology, 49, 1253-1258.
    • Monsch, A. U., Seifritz, E., Taylor, K. I., Ermini-Funfschilling, D., Stahelin, H. B., & Spiegel, R. (1997). Category fluency is also predominately affected in Swiss Alzheimer's disease patients. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, 95, 81-84.
    • Moray, N. (1959). Attention in dichotic listening: Affective cues and the influence of instructions. Quarterly Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 11, 56-60.
    • Morris, N., & Jones, D. M. (1990a). Habituation to irrelevant speech: Effects on a visual short-term memory task. Perception and Psychophysics, 47, 291-297.
    • Morris, N., & Jones, D. M. (1990b). Memory updating and working memory: The role of the central executive. British Journal o f Psychology, 81, 111-121.
    • Morris, N., & Jones, D. M. (1991). Impaired transcription from VDUs in noisy environments. In E. J. Lovesey (Ed.), Contemporary Ergonomics. London: Taylor & Francis.
    • Morris, N., Jones, D. M., & Quayle, A. (1989). Memory disruption by background speech and singing. In E. Megaw (Ed.). Contemporary Ergonomics. London: Taylor & Francis.
    • Mortimer, B. L., Briscoe, J., & Jones, D. M. (2004). Children, not adults, are distracted by the intensity of irrelevant sound: Developmental insights into differential mechanisms of auditory distraction. British Psychological Society (BPS) Conference (Cognitive Section), Leeds, UK.
    • Moscovitch, M. (1994). Cognitive resources and dual-task interference effects at retrieval in normal people: The role o f the frontal lobes and medial temporal cortex. Neuropsychology, 8, 524-534.
    • Mueller, C. W., & Watkins, M. J. (1977). Inhibition from part-set cuing: A cue-overload interpretation. Journal o f Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 699-709.
    • Mulligan, N. W. (2002). The effects of generation on conceptual implicit memory. Journal o f Memory and Language, 47, 327-342.
    • Mulligan, N. W., & Stone, M. V. (1999). Attention and conceptual priming: Limits on the effects of divided attention in the category-exemplar production task. Journal o f Memory and Language, 41, 253-280.
    • Mummery, C. J., Patterson, K., Hodges, J. R., & Wise, R. J. (1996). Generating 'tiger' as an animal name or a word beginning with T: differences in brain activation. Proceedings o f the Royal Society o f London B : Biological Sciences, 263, 989-995.
    • Murphy, M. D. (1979). Measurement o f category clustering in free recall. In C. R. Puff (Ed.). Memory organization and structure (pp. 51-83). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
    • Naime, J. S. (1990). A feature model of immediate memory. Memory and Cognition, 18, 251-269.
    • Naime, J. S., Rielger, G. L., & Serra, M. (1991). Dissociative effects of generation on item and order retention. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 17, 702-709.
    • Neath, I. (1999). Modelling the disruptive effects of irrelevant speech on order information. International Journal o f Psychology, 34, 410-418.
    • Neath, I. (2000). Modelling the effects o f irrelevant speech on memory. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 1, 403-423.
    • Neath, I., Farley, L. A., & Surprenant, A. M. (2003). Directly assessing the relationship between irrelevant speech and articulatory suppression. Quarterly Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 56A, 1269-1278.
    • Neath, I., & Surprenant, A. M. (2001). The irrelevant sound effect is not always the same as the irrelevant speech effect. In H. L. Roediger III, J. S. Naime, I. Neath, & A. M. Surprenant (Eds.), The nature o f remembering: Essays in honor o f Robert G. Crowder (pp. 247-265). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
    • Neath, I., Surprenant, A. M., & LeCompte, D. C. (1998). Irrelevant speech, phonological similarity, and presentation modality. Memory, 7, 405-420.
    • Nebes, R. D., Martin, D. C., & Horn, L. C. (1984). Sparing of semantic memory in Alzheimer's disease. Journal o f Abnormal Psychology, 93, 321-330.
    • Neely, C. B., & LeCompte, D. C. (1999). The importance o f semantic similarity to the irrelevant speech effect. Memory and Cognition, 27, 37-44.
    • Neely, J. H., & Kahan, T. A. (2001). Is semantic activation automatic: A critical reevaluation. In H. L. Roediger, J. S. Naime, I. Neath & A. M. Surprenant (Eds.), The nature o f remembering: essays in honor o f Robert G. Crowder. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
    • Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive Psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
    • Nelson, D. L., Bennet, D. J., & Leibert, T. W. (1997). One step is not enough: Making better use of association norms to predict cued recall. Memory and Cognition, 25, 785-796.
    • Nelson, D. L., Schreiber, T. A., & McEvoy, C. L. (1992). Processing implicit and explicit representations. Psychological Review, 99, 322-348.
    • Neumann, E., & DeSchepper, B. G. (1992). An inhibition based fan effect: Evidence for an active suppression mechanism in selective attention. Canadian Journal o f Psychology, 46, 1-40.
    • Neumann, E., Cherau, J. F., Hood, K. L., & Steinnagel, S. L. (1993). Does inhibition spread in a manner analogous to spreading activation? Memory, 7, 81-105.
    • Neumann, O. (1984). Automatic processing: A review o f recent findings and a plea for an old theory. In W. Prinz and A. F. Sanders (Eds.), Perspektiven der Kognitionpsychologie. Berlin: Springer.
    • Neumann, O. (1987). Beyond capacity: A functional view of attention. In H. Heuer and A. F. Sanders (Eds), Perspectives on perception and action. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    • Neumann, O. (1989). On the origins and status of the concept of automatic processing. Zeitschriftfu r Psychologies 197, 411-428.
    • Neumann, O. (1996). Theories of attention. In O. Neumann and A.F. Sanders (Eds.), Handbook o fperception and action, (Vol. 3, pp. 389-446). London: Academic Press.
    • Newcombe, F. (1969). Missile wounds o f the brain. London: Oxford University Press.
    • Nickerson, R. S. (1984). Retrieval inhibition from part-set cueing: A persistent enigma in memory research. Memory and Cognitions 12, 531-552.
    • Norman, D. A. (1976). Memory and attention. New York: Wiley.
    • Norris, D. (2005). How do computational models help us develop better theories. In A. Cutler, (Ed.). Twenty-First Century Psycholinguistics'. Four Cornerstones (pp. 331 - 346). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    • Ortells, J. L., &Tudela, P. (1996). Positive and negative semantic priming of attended and unattended parafoveal words in a lexical decision task. Acta Psychologica, 94, 209-226.
    • Oswald, C. J. P., Tremblay, S., & Jones, D. M. (2000). Disruption of comprehension by the meaning of irrelevant sound. Memory, 8, 345-350.
    • Page, M. P. A., & Norris, D. (1998). The primacy model: A new model of immediate serial recall. Psychological Review, 105, 761-781.
    • Page, M. P. A., & Norris, D. G. (2003). The irrelevant sound effect: What needs modelling, and a tentative model. Quarterly Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 56A, 1289-1300.
    • Parente, J. A. (1976). Music preference as a factor of music distraction. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 43, 337-338.
    • Park, D. C., Smith, A. D., Dudley, W. D., & Lafonza, V. N. (1989). Effects of age and a divided attention task presented during retrieval and encoding on memory. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 15, 1185- 1191.
    • Pashler, H. E. (1998). The Psychology o f Attention. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    • Pellegrino, J. W., & Battig, W. F. (1974). Relationships among higher order organizational measures and free recall. Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 102, 463-472.
    • Perfect, T. J., Moulin, C. J. A, Conway, M. A, & Perry, E. (2002). Assessing the Inhibitory Account of Retrieval-Induced Forgetting With Implicit-Memory Tests. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 1111- 1119.
    • Perham, N., Banbury, S., & Jones, D. M. (2005). Auditory distraction impairs analytical reasoning performance. In M. Katsikitis (Ed.), Past Reflections, Future Directions: Proceedings o f the 40thAustralian Psychological Society Annual Conference, Melbourne, Australia (pp. 238-242).
    • Perham, N., Hughes, R. W., & Jones, D. M. (2006). Attention to 'irrelevant' sound during a habituation period does not produce habituation. Manuscript in preparation.
    • Perham, N. & Jones, D. M. (2006). Reduction in auditory distraction by retrieval strategy. Memory. Manuscript in press.
    • Perret, E. (1974). The left frontal lobe of man and the suppression of habitual responses in verbal categorical behaviour. Neuropsychologia, 72, 223-230.
    • Perez-Mata, M. N., Read, J. D., & Diges, M. (2002). Effects of divided attention and word concreteness on correct recall and false memory reports. Memory and Cognition, 70, 161-177.
    • Pihlajamaki, M., Tanila, H., Hanninen, T., Kononen, M., Laakso, M., Partanen, K., et al. (2000). Verbal fluency activates the left medial temporal lobe: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Annals o f Neurology, 4 7 ,470-476.
    • Plaut, D. C., & Shallice, T. (1993). Deep dyslexia: A case study of connectionist neuropsychology. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 10, 377-500.
    • Pollio, H. R., Mahoney, P., & Green, M. J. (1974). Reconstructive processes in the free recall of categories. Memory and Cognition, 2, 139-143.
    • Pope, D., & Jones, D. M. (2002). Interference by two processes in attentional selectivity. Unpublished manuscript. School of Psychology, Cardiff University.
    • Popper, K. R. (1959). The Logic o f Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson.
    • Posner, M. I., & Boies, S. J. (1972). Components of attention. Psychological Review, 78, 391-408.
    • Postman, L. (1972). A pragmatic view of organization theory. In E. Tulving & W. Donaldson (Eds.). Organization o f memory (pp. 3-47). New York: Academic Press.
    • Postman, L., & Phillips, L. W. (1965). Short-term temporal changes in free recall. Quarterly Journal o fExperimental Psychology, 17, 132-138.
    • Potter, M. C., Moryadas, A., Abrams, I., & Noel, A. (1993). Word perception and misperception in context. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 9, 3-22.
    • Raaijmakers, J. G. W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1980). SAM: A theory o f probabilistic search of associative memory. In G. Bower (Ed.), The Psychology o f Learning and Motivation (Vol. 14, pp. 207-262). New York: Academic Press.
    • Raaijmakers, J. G. W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1981). Search of associative memory. Psychological Review, 88, 93-134.
    • Rabinowitz, J. C. (1989). Judgements o f origin and generation effects: Comparison between young and elderly adults. Psychology and Aging, 4, 259-268.
    • Rajaram, S. (1993). Remembering and knowing: Two means of access to the personal past. Memory and Cognition, 21, 89-102.
    • Ramier, A. M., & Hecaen, H. (1970). Role respectif des atteintes frontales et de la lateralisation lesionnelle dans les deficits de la “fluence verbale”. Revue Neurologique, 123, 17-22.
    • Ransdell, S. E., & Gilroy, L. (2001). The effect of background music on word processed writing. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 141-148.
    • Ransdell, S., Levy, C. M., & Kellogg, R. T. (2002). The structure of writing processes as revealed by secondary task demands. L-l-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 2, 141-163.
    • Rappold, V. A., & Hashtroudi, S. (1991). Does organization improve priming? Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 103-114.
    • Rauscher, F. H., Shaw, G. L. & Ky, K. N (1993). Listening to Mozart enhances spatialtemporal reasoning: Towards a neurophysiological basis. Neuroscience Letters, 185, 44-47.
    • Ravinkilde, B., Videbech, P., Rosenberg, R., Gjedde, A., & Gade, A. (2002). Putative tests of frontal lobe function: A PET study o f brain activation during Stroop's Test and verbal fluency. Journal o f Clinical & Experimental Neuropsychology, 24, 534- 547.
    • Read, J. D. (1996). From a passing thought to a false memory in 2 minutes: confusing real and illusory events. Psychological Bulletin and Review, 3, 105-111.
    • Remez, R. E., Rubin, P. E., Pisoni, D. B., & Carrell, T. D. (1981). Speech perception without traditional speech cues. Science, 212, 947-949.
    • Reyna, V. F., & Brainerd, C. J. (1995). Fuzzy-trace theory: An interim synthesis. Learning and Individual Differences, 7, 1-75.
    • Richardson, J. T. E. (1984). Developing the theory of working memory. Memory and Cognition, 12, 71-83.
    • Riddoch, M. J., Humphreys. G. W., Coltheart, M., & Funnell, E. (1988). Semantic systems or system? Neuropsychological evidence re-examined. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 7, 161-189.
    • Rivenez, M., Darwin, C. J., & Guillaume, A. (2006). Processing unattended speech. Journal o f the Acoustical Society o fAmerica, 119, 4027-4040.
    • Rizzolatti G., & Craighero L. (1998). Spatial attention: Mechanisms and theories. In Sabourin et al. (Ed.), Advances in Psychological Science: Biological and Cognitive Aspects. Psychology Press, Hove, UK.
    • Roberts, S., & Pashler, H. (2000). How persuasive is a good fit? A comment on theory testing. Psychological Review, 107, 358-367.
    • Roberts, S., & Pashler, H. (2002). Reply to Rodgers and Rowe (2002). Psychological Review, 109, 605-607.
    • Roediger, H. L. III., Balota, D. A., & Watson, J. M. (2001). Spreading activation and the arousal of false memories. In H. L. Roediger III, J. S. Naime, I. Neath., and A. M. Surprenant. (Eds.), The nature o f remembering'. Essays in honor o f Robert G. Crowder (pp. 95-115). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
    • Roediger, H. L. III., Gallo, D. A., & Geraci, L. (2002). Processing approaches to cognition: The impetus from the levels-of-processing framework. Memory, 10, 319- 332.
    • Roediger, H.L. III., & McDermott, K.B. (1995). Creating false memories: Remembering words that were not presented in lists. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 803-814.
    • Roediger, H.L. III., Watson, J.M., McDermott, K.B. & Gallo, D.A. (2001). Factors that determine false recall: A multiple regression analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 8, 385-407.
    • Roelofs, A. (2005). The visual-auditory color-word Stroop asymmetry and its time course. Memory and Cognition, 33, 1325-1336.
    • Rohrer, D., Salmon, D. P., Wixted, J. T., & Paulsen, J. S. (1999). The disparate effects of Alzheimer's disease and Huntington's disease on semantic memory. Neuropsychology, 13, 381-388.
    • Romney, A. K., Brewer, D. D., & Batchelder, W. H. (1993). Predicting clustering from semantic structure. Psychological Science, 4, 28-34.
    • Rosen, V. M., & Engle, R. W. (1997). The role of working memory capacity in retrieval. Journal o f Experimental Psychology. General, 126, 211-227.
    • Rosser, A., & Hodges, J. R. (1994). Initial letter and semantic category fluency in Alzheimer's disease, Huntingtons disease and progressive supranuclear palsy. Journal o fNeurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 57, 1389-1394.
    • Rouleau, N., & Belleville, S. (1996). The irrelevant speech effect in aging: An assessment of inhibition processes in working memory. Journal o f Gerentology: Psychological Sciences, 5IB, 356-363.
    • Rundus, D. (1971). Analysis of rehearsal processes in free recall. Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 89, 63-77.
    • Rundus, D. (1973). Negative effects o f using list items as retrieval cues. Journal o f Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 43-50.
    • Saito, S., & Baddeley, A. D. (2004). Irrelevant sound disrupts speech production: Exploring the relationship between short-term memory and experimentally induced slips of the tongue. Quarterly Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 57, 1309-1340.
    • Salame, P., & Baddeley, A. D. (1982). Disruption o f short-term memory by unattended speech: Implications for the structure of working memory. Journal o f Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21, 150-164.
    • Salame, P., & Baddeley, A. D. (1986). Phonological factors in STM: Similarity and the unattended speech effect. Bulletin o f the Psychonomic Society, 24, 253-265.
    • Salame, P., & Baddeley, A. D. (1987). Noise, unattended speech and short-term memory. Ergonomics, 30, 1185-1193.
    • Salame, P., & Baddeley, A. D. (1989). Effects of background music on phonological short-term memory. Quarterly Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 41A, 107-122.
    • Salame, P., & Baddeley, A. D. (1990). The effects of irrelevant speech on immediate free recall. Bulletin o f the Psychonomic Society, 28, 540-542.
    • Salame, P. & Wittersheim, G. (1978). Selective noise disturbance of the information input in short-term memory. Quarterly Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 30, 693- 704.
    • Samson, D., & Pillon, A. (2003). A case of impaired knowledge for fruit and vegetables. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20, 373-400.
    • Schacter, D. L, Israel, L., & Racine, C. (1999). Suppressing false recognition in younger and older adults: the distinctiveness heuristic. Journal o f Memory and Language, 40, 1-24.
    • Schaeffer, B., and Wallace, R. (1969). Semantic similarity and the comparison of word meanings. Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 82, 343-346.
    • Schriefers, H., Meyer, A. S., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1990). Exploring the time course of lexical access in language production: Picture-word interference studies. Journal o f Memory and Language, 29, 86-102.
    • Schvide, G., & Anderson, M. C. (2001). The role of inhibition in meaning selection: Insights from retrieval-induced forgetting. In D. Gorfein. (Ed.), On the consequences o f meaning selection: Perspectives on resolving lexical ambiguity (pp. 175-190). Washingston, DC: American Psychological Association.
    • Schwartz, S., Baldo, J., Graves, R. E., & Brugger, P. (2003). Pervasive influence of semantics in letter and category fluency: A multidimensional approach. Brain and Language, 87, 400-410.
    • Serra, M., & Naime, J. S. (2000). Part-set cuing of order information: Implications for associative theories of serial order memory. Memory and Cognition, 28, 847-855.
    • Sheffert, S. M., Pisoni, D. B., Fellowes, J. M., & Remez, R. E. (2002). Learning to recognize talkers from natural, sinewave, and reversed speech samples. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 1447-1469.
    • Shimada, H. (1990). Effect of auditory presentation of words on colour naming: The intermodal Stroop effect. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 70, 1155-1161.
    • Shimamura, A. P. (1995). Memory and frontal lobe function. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The cognitive neurosciences (pp. 803-813). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    • Shuell, T. J. (1969). Clustering and organization in free recall. Psychological Bulletin, 72, 353-374.
    • Smith, A. P. (1985a). The effects of noise on the processing o f global shape and local detail. Psychological Research, 47, 103-108.
    • Smith, A. P. (1985b). The effects of different types of noise on semantic processing and syntactic reasoning. Acta Psychologica, 58, 263-273.
    • Smith, A. P., & Broadbent, D. E. (1981). Noise and levels of processing. Acta Psychologica, 47, 129-142.
    • Smith, A. P., & Jones, D. M. (1992). Noise and Performance. In A. P. Smith and D. M. Jones (Eds.), Handbook o f human performance (Vol. 1, pp. 1-28). London: Academic Press.
    • Smith, A. P., Jones, D. M., & Broadbent, D. E. (1981). The effects of noise on recall of categorized lists. British Journal o f Psychology, 72, 299-316.
    • Smith, E. E., & Medin, D. L. (1981). Categories and concepts. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    • Smith, E. E., Shoben, E. J., & Rips, L. J. (1974). Structure and process in semantic memory: A feature model for semantic decisions. Psychological Review, 81, 214- 241.
    • Smith, M. C., & Groen, M. (1974). Evidence for semantic analysis of unattended verbal items. Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 102, 595-603.
    • Smith, R. E., & Hunt, R. R. (1998). Presentation modality affects false memory. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 5, 710-715.
    • Smith, R. E., Lozito, J. P., & Bayen, U. J. (2005). Adult age differences in distinctive processing: The modality effect on false recall. Psychology and Aging, 20, 486-492.
    • Smith, S. M. (1985). Background music and context-dependent memory. American Journal o f Psychology, 98, 591-603.
    • Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., Tindell, D. R , Sifonis, C. M., & Wilkenfeld, M. J. (2000). Category structure and created memories. Memory and Cognition, 28, 386-395.
    • Smith, S. M., Tindell, D. R., Pierce, B. H., Gilliland, T. R., & Gerkens, D. R. (2001). Source memory failure in episodic confusion errors. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 362-374.
    • Smith, S. M., Gerkens, D. R., Pierce, B. H., & Choi, H. (2002). The roles of associative responses at study and semantically guided recollection at test in false memory: the Kirkpatrick and Deese hypotheses. Journal o f Memory and Language, 47, 436-447.
    • Sommers, M. S., & Lewis, B. P. (1999). Who really lives next door: Creating false memories with phonological neighbors. Journal o f Memory and Language, 40, 83-108.
    • Stanton, H. E. (1975). Music and test anxiety: Further evidence for an interaction. British Journal o f Educational Psychology, 45, 80-82.
    • Stams, J. J., & Hicks, J. L. (2004). Episodic generation can cause semantic forgetting: Retrieval-induced forgetting of false memories. Memory and Cognition, 32, 602-609.
    • Starreveld, PA (2000). On the interpretation of auditory context effects in word production. Journal o f Memory and Language, 42, 497-525.
    • Steele, K. M., Bass, K, E., & Crook, M. D. (1999). The mystery of the Mozart effect: Failure to replicate. Psychological Science, 101, 366-369.
    • Steyvers, M., Shiffrin, R.M., & Nelson, D.L. (2004). Word Association Spaces for Predicting Semantic Similarity Effects in Episodic Memory. In A. Healy (Ed.), Experimental cognitive psychology and its applications: Festschrift in honor o f Lyle Bourne, Walter Kintsch, and Thomas Landauer. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
    • Stuart, D. M., & Carrasco, M. (1993). Semantic component o f a cross-modal Strooplike task. American Journal o f Psychology, 106, 383-405.
    • Stuss, D. T., & Benson, D. F. (1986). Thefrontal lobes. New York: Raven Press.
    • Stuss, D. T., Alexander, M. P., Hamer, L., Palumbo, C., Dempster, R., Binns, M., Levine, B., & Izukawa, D. (1998). The effects o f focal anterior and posterior brain lesions on verbal fluency. Journal o f the International Neuropsychological Society, 4 ,265-278.
    • Styles, E. A. (1997). The psychology o f attention. London: Psychology Press.
    • Suhr, J. A., & Jones, R. D. (1998). Letter and semantic fluency in Alzheimer's, Huntington's and Parkinson's dementias. Archives o f Clinical Neuropsychology, 73, 447-454.
    • Sussman, E., Horvath, J., Winkler, I., & Orr, M. (2006). The role of attention in the formation of auditory streams. Perception and Psychophysics. Manuscript in press.
    • Sussman, E., Ritter, W., & Vaughn, H. G. (1999). An investigation of the auditory streaming effect using event-related brain potentials. Psychophysiology, 36, 22-34.
    • Thackray, R. I., & Jones, K. N. (1971). Level o f arousal during Stroop performance: Effects of speech stress and 'distraction'. Psychonomic Science, 23, 133-135.
    • Thackray, R. I., Jones, K. N., & Touchstone, R. M. (1972). The colour-word interference test and its relation to performance impairment under auditory distraction. Psychonomic Science, 28, 225-227.
    • Thapar, A. & McDermott, K. B. (2001). False recall and false recognition induced by presentation of associated words: Effects of retention interval and level of processing. Memory and Cognition, 29, 424-432.
    • Thompson-Schill, S. L., D'Esposito, M., Aguire, G. K., & Farah, M. J. (1997). Role of left inferior prefrontal cortex inn retrieval o f semantic knowledge: A reevaluation. Proceedings o f the National Academy o f Sciences, 94, 14792-14797.
    • Thompson-Schill, S. L., & Kan, I. P. (2000). Relationship between set size and prefrontal activity during verbal fluency. Cognitive Neuroscience Annual Meeting Program.
    • Tipper, S. P. (1992). Selection for action: The role of inhibitory mechanisms. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 105-109.
    • Tipper, S. P., & Driver, J. (1988). Negative priming between pictures and words in a selective attention task: Evidence for semantic processing of ignored stimuli. Memory and Cognition, 16, 64-70.
    • Toglia, M. P., Hinman, P. J., Dayton, B. S., & Catalano, J. F. (1997). The blockedrandom effect in pictures and words. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 84, 976-978.
    • Toglia, M. P., Neuschatz, J. S., & Goodwin, K. A. (1999). Recall accuracy and illusory memories: When more is less. Memory, 7, 233-256.
    • Tolan, G. A., & Tehan, G. (2002). Testing feature interaction: Between-stream irrelevant speech effects in immediate recall. Journal o f Memory and Language, 46, 562-585.
    • Tombu, M. & Jolicoeur, P. (2003). A central capacity sharing model of dual-task performance. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 3-18.
    • Toth, J. P., & Hunt, R. R. (1999). Not one versus many, but zero versus any: Structure and function in the context of the multiple memory systems debate. In J. K. Foster & M. Jelicic (Eds.), Memory'. Systems, Process, or Function? (pp. 232-272). New York: Oxford University Press.
    • Tranel, D., Damasio, H., & Damasio, A. R. (1997). A neural basis for the retrieval of conceptual knowledge. Neuropsychologia, 35, 1319-1327.
    • Traub, E., & Geffen, G. (1979). Phonemic and category encoding o f unattended words in Dichotic listening. Memory and Cognition, 7, 56-65.
    • Treisman, A. M. (1960). Contextual cues in selective listening. Quarterly Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 12, 242-248.
    • Treisman, A. M. (1964). Verbal cues, language and meaning in selective attention. American Journal o f Psychology, 77, 206-219.
    • Treisman, A. M. (1969). Strategies and models o f selective attention. Psychological Review, 76, 282-299.
    • Tremblay, S., & Jones, D. M. (1998). The role of habituation in the irrelevant sound effect: Evidence from the role of token set size and rate of habituation. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 659-671.
    • Tremblay, S., & Jones, D. M. (1999). Change of intensity fails to produce an irrelevant sound effect: implications for the representation of unattended sound. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1005-1015.
    • Tremblay, S., Macken, W. J., & Jones, D. M. (2001). The impact of broadband noise on serial memory: Changes in band-pass frequency increase disruption. Memory, 9, 323- 331.
    • Tremblay, S., Nicholls, A. P., Alford, D., & Jones, D. M. (2000). The ISE: Does speech play a special role? Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1750-1754.
    • Troster, A. I., Salmon, D. P., McCullough, D., & Butters, N. (1989). A comparison of the category fluency deficits associated with Alzheimer's and Huntington's disease. Brain and Language, 37, 500-513.
    • Troyer, A. K., Moscovitch, M., Winocur, G., Alexander, M. P., & Stuss, D. (1998). Clustering and switching on verbal fluency: the effects of focal frontal- and temporal-lobe lesions. Neuropsychologia, 36, 499-504.
    • Troyer, A. K., Moscovitch, M., & Winocur, G. (1997). Clustering and switching as two components of verbal fluency: Evidence from younger and older healthy adults. Neuropsychology, 11, 138-146.
    • Tulving, E. (1964). Intratrial and intertrial retention: Notes toward a theory of free recall verbal learning. Psychological Review, 71, 219-237.
    • Tulving, E. (1968). Theoretical issues in free recall. In T. R. Dixon & D. L. Horton (Eds.), Verbal behavior and general behavior theory (pp. 2-36). Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall.
    • Tulving, E. (1985a). Memory and consciousness. Canadian Psychologist, 26, 1-12.
    • Tulving, E. (1985b). How many memory systems are there? American Psychologist, 40, 385-398.
    • Tulving, E. (1999). Study of memory: Processes and systems. In J. K. Foster & M. Jelicic (Eds.), Memory: Systems, process, orfunction? (pp. 11-30). New York: Oxford University Press.
    • Tulving, E., & Thomson, D. M. (1973). Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychological Review, 80, 352-373.
    • Tussing, A. A., & Greene, R. L. (1997). False recognition of associates: How robust is the effect? Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 4, 572-576.
    • Underwood, B. J. (1965). False recognition produced by implicit verbal responses. Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 70, 122-129.
    • Underwood, G. (1981). Lexical recognition of embedded unattended words: Some implications for reading processes. Acta Psychologica, 47, 267-283.
    • Underwood, G. & Everatt, J. (1996). Automatic and controlled information processing: The role of attention in the processing of novelty. In O. Neumann and A.F. Sanders (Eds.), Handbook o fperception and action, (Vol. 3, pp. 185-221). London: Academic Press.
    • Van der Heijden, A. H. C. (1992). Selective attention in vision. London: Routledge, Chapman and Hall.
    • VanNoorden, L. (1975). Temporal Coherence in the Perception o f Tone Sequences. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Eindhoven University o f Technology.
    • Van Overschelde, J. P., Rawson, K. A., Dunlosky, J. (2004). Category norms: An updated and expanded version of the Battig and Montague (1969) norms. Journal o f Memory and Language, 50, 289-335.
    • Wagner, A. D. (2002). Cognitive control and episodic memory. In L. R Squire & D. L. Schachter (Eds.). Neuropsychology o f Memory (3rd Edn). New York: Guilford Press.
    • Wallace, W. P. (1970). Consistency of emission order in free recall. Journal o f Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 9, 58-68.
    • Wallace, W. P., Malone, C. P., & Spoo, A. D. (2000). Implicit word activation during precognition processing: False recognition and remember/know judgements. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 7, 149-157.
    • Wallace, W. P., Stewart, M. T., Sherman, H. L., & Mellor, M. D. (1995). False positives in recognition memory produced by cohort activation. Cognition, 55, 85- 113.
    • Walley, R. E., & Weiden, T. D. (1973). Lateral inhibition and cognitive masking. A neuropsychological theory of attention. Psychological Review, 80, 284-302.
    • Warren, R. M., & Obuzek, C. J. (1972). Identification of temporal order within auditory sequences. Perception and Psychophysics, 12, 86-90.
    • Warrington, E. K., & Shallice, T. (1984). Category specific access dysphasia. Brain, 106, 859-878.
    • Watkins, M. J., & Allender, L. E. (1987). Inhibiting word generation with word presentations. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 13, 564-568.
    • Watkins, M. J., & Peynircioglu, Z. F. (1982). A perspective on rehearsal. In G. H. Bower, (Ed), The psychology o f learning and motivation (Vol. 16, pp. 153-190). London: Academic Press.
    • Watkins, M. J., & Tulving, E. (1975). Episodic memory: When recognition fails. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: General, 1, 5-29.
    • Watkins, C., & Watkins, M. J. (1975). Buildup o f proactive inhibition as a cueoverload effect. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1 ,442-452.
    • Watson, J. M., Balota, D. A., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2003). Creating false memories with hybrid lists o f semantic and phonological associates: Over-additive false memories produced by converging associative networks. Journal o f Memory and Language, 49, 95-118.
    • Watson, J.M., Bunting, M.F., Poole, B.J., & Conway, A.R.A. (2005). Individual differences in susceptibility to false memory in the Deese-Roediger-McDermott paradigm. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 76-85.
    • Watson, J. M., McDermott, K. B., & Balota, D. A. (2004). Attempting to avoid false memories in the Deese/Roediger-McDermott paradigm: Assessing the combined influence o f practice and warnings in young and old adults. Memory and Cognition, 32, 135-141.
    • Weinstein, N. D. (1974). The effect of noise on intellectual performance. Journal o f Applied Psychology, 59, 548-554.
    • Weinstein, N. D. (1977). Noise and intellectual performance: A confirmation and extension. Journal o fApplied Psychology, 62, 104-107.
    • Weist, R. M. (1972). The role of rehearsal: Recopy or reconstruct? Journal o f Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 440-450.
    • Weist, R. M., & Crawford, C. (1973). Sequential versus organized rehearsal. Journal o f Experimental Psychology, 101, 237-241.
    • Wentura, D., & Frings, C. (2005). Repeated masked category primes interfere with related exemplars: New evidence for negative semantic priming. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 108-120.
    • Wertsch, J. V. (1979). The concept o f activity in Soviet psychology. New York: M.E. Sharpe, Inc.
    • Wetherick, N. E. (1975). The role o f semantic information in short-term memory. Journal o f Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 471-480.
    • Wetherick, N. E. (1976). Semantic information in short-term memory: Effects if presenting recall instructions after the list. Bulletin o f the Psychonomic Society, 8, 79- 81.
    • Wickens, C. D. (1992). Engineering psychology and human performance. New York: Harper Collins.
    • Wickens, C. D. (2002). Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomic Science, 3, 159-177.
    • Williams, C. C., & Zacks, R. T. (2001). Is retrieval induced forgetting an inhibitory process? American Journal o f Psychology, 114, 329-354.
    • Wingfield, A., Lindfield, K. C., & Kahana, M. J. (1998). Adult age differences in the
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article