ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2020
Auditory distraction in school-age children relative to individual differences in working memory capacity.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Not just heard, but judged: a multidimensional perspective on auditory attention in everyday life.Frontiers in neuroergonomics · 2026Review
- Test-Retest Reliability and the Role of Task Instructions when Measuring Listening Effort Using a Verbal Response Time Paradigm.Seminars in hearing · 2023Review
- Speech Perception in Noise Predicts Oral Narrative Comprehension in Children With Developmental Language Disorder.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- The Effects of Working Memory Load on Auditory Distraction in Adults With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
- Relationship Between Auditory Distraction and Emotional Dimensionality for Non-Speech Sounds.Ear and hearingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We examined susceptibility to auditory distraction and its association to working-memory capacity (WMC) in children (N=125) using a dichotic listening task. Performance in a dichotic listening task was measured with and without distracting multi-talker babble (MTB). Intrusion errors from the to-be-ignored ear and the overall errors of any type between the two conditions were modeled to explain the role of WMC and the potential moderating effect of MTB, while controlling for age. Susceptibility to auditory distraction when represented by the absolute difference in errors between MTB and no-MTB conditions was not associated with WMC and age. That is, children with greater WMC were no better at ignoring interference from babble than children with low WMC. This suggests that irrelevant sounds have obligatory access to verbal short-term memory and are not effectively suppressed by the attention-controlled WM system. However, when ratio of errors with and without MTB was analyzed, children with high WMC made more errors compared to children with low WMC. Developmental improvements in children's WMC do not appear to advantage listening in the presence of distracting background noise. Therefore, enhancement of target speech in children's learning environments is crucial.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32494910What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.