The Irrelevant Speech Effect on Reading in Older Adults: Evidence from Eye Movements

Abstract

Abstract: The present study investigated the influences of different irrelevant speeches during Chinese reading between older and younger readers by using measurements of eye movements. Participants were asked to read passages in the presence of meaningful speech, meaningless speech, and silence. Results showed that: 1) There was significant irrelevant speech effect on Chinese passage reading for all the participants, such that the meaningful background speech reduced participants’ reading rate, and led them to make more and longer fixations, shorter forward saccades. 2) Both groups of readers spent longer time on target words when exposed to meaningful speech. 3) No significant differences in irrelevant speech effects between younger and older adults were observed. These results suggest that older adults’ ability to suppress the interference of semantic content in background noise does not decline during natural reading.

Key words: irrelevant speech effect, aging, passage reading, eye movement

摘要： 采用眼动记录技术考察有意义言语、无意义言语和安静环境对老年和青年读者篇章阅读和词汇加工过程的影响。结果发现：相比于安静和无意义言语条件，所有被试在有意义言语条件下的篇章阅读速度降低，平均注视时间更长，向前眼跳长度缩短，目标词上的总注视时间更长，表现出显著的无关言语效应，而这一效应不存在显著的年龄差异。结果表明，与青年人相同，老年人的后期词汇加工和篇章语义信息加工受到了无关言语中语义成分的干扰。说明在自然阅读过程中，老年人抑制背景言语语义信息干扰的能力与青年人相似。

关键词: 无关言语效应, 老化, 篇章阅读, 眼动

CLC Number:

B844

HE Liyuan, TIAN Xue, LI Yue, SHEN Fengdan, WANG Yongsheng, WU Jie. The Irrelevant Speech Effect on Reading in Older Adults: Evidence from Eye Movements[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(3): 375-381.

何立媛, 田雪, 李悦, 沈凤丹, 王永胜, 吴捷. 无关言语影响老年人阅读过程的眼动研究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(3): 375-381.

References

郭惠兰, 宋子明, 张煜婧, 闫国利. (2017). 新闻广播背景音对大学生阅读效率影响的眼动研究. 心理研究, 10(4), 15-21, doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-1159.2017.04.003
何立媛, 黄有玉, 王梦轩, 孟珠, 闫国利. (2015). 不同背景音对中文篇章阅读影响的眼动研究. 心理科学, 38(6), 1290-1295
孟珠, 闫国利. (2018). 阅读任务中无关言语效应的作用机制:干扰基于内容还是过程? 心理科学进展, 26(2), 262-269.
彭华茂, 毛晓飞. (2018). 抑制对老年人舌尖现象的影响. 心理学报, 50(10), 1142-1150
闫国利, 孟珠. (2018). 无关言语对阅读的干扰基于内容还是过程?——来自眼动研究的证据. 心理科学, 41(1), 2-7
闫国利, 熊建萍, 臧传丽, 余莉莉, 崔磊, 白学军. (2013). 阅读研究中的主要眼动指标评述. 心理科学进展, 21(4), 589-605
Ashby, J. (2010). Phonology is fundamental in skilled reading:Evidence from ERPs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 95-100, doi:10.3758/PBR.17.1.95.
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. M., & Walker, S. C. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1-48.
Bell, R., & Buchner, A. (2007). Equivalent irrelevant-sound effects for old and young adults. Memory & Cognition, 35(2), 352-364.
Bell, R., Buchner, A., & Mund, I. (2008). Age-related differences in irrelevant-speech effects. Psychology and Aging, 23(2), 377-391, doi:10.1037/0882-7974.23.2.377.
Colle, H. A., & Welsh, A. (1976). Acoustic masking in primary memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15(1), 17-31, doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(76)90003-7.
Connelly, S. L., Hasher, L., & Zacks, R. T. (1991). Age and reading:The impact of distraction. Psychology and Aging, 6(4), 533-541, doi:10.1037/0882-7974.6.4.533.
Elliott, E. M. (2002). The irrelevant-speech effect and children:Theoretical implications of developmental change. Memory & Cognition, 30, 478-487.
Elliott, E. M., & Cowan, N. (2005). Coherence of the irrelevant-sound effect:Individual profiles of short-term memory and susceptibility to task-irrelevant materials. Memory & Cognition, 33, 664-675.
Guerreiro, M. J. S., Murphy, D. R., & van Gerven, P. W. M. (2010). The role of sensory modality in age-related distraction:A critical review and a renewed view. Psychological Bulletin, 136(6), 975-1022, doi:10.1037/a0020731.
Guerreiro, M. J. S., Murphy, D. R., & van Gerven, P. W. M. (2013). Making sense of age-related distractibility:The critical role of sensory modality. Acta Psychologica, 142(2), 184-194, doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.11.007.
Hsieh, S., & Lin, Y. C. (2017). Strategies for stimulus selective stopping in the elderly. Acta Psychologica, 173, 122-131, doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.12.011.
Hyönä, J., & Ekholm, M. (2016). Background speech effects on sentence processing during reading:An eye movement study. PLoS One, 11(3), e0152133, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0152133.
Jones, D. M., & Macken, W. J. (1993). Irrelevant tones produce an irrelevant speech effect:Implications for phonological coding in working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19(2), 369-381, doi:10.1037/0278-7393.19.2.369.
Kemper, S., & McDowd, J. (2006). Eye movements of young and older adults while reading with distraction. Psychology and Aging, 21(1), 32-39.
Lustig, C., Hasher, L., & Zacks, R. (2007). Inhibitory deficit theory:Recent developments in a "new view". In D. S. Gorfein & C. M. MacLeod (Eds.), The place of inhibition in cognition (pp. 145-162). Washington:American Psychological Association.
Mahajan, Y., Kim, J., & Davis, C. (2020). Does working memory protect against auditory distraction in older adults? BMC Geriatrics, 20(1), 515, doi:10.1186/s12877-020-01909-w.
Marsh, J. E., Hughes, R. W., & Jones, D. M. (2009). Interference by process, not content, determines semantic auditory distraction. Cognition, 110(1), 23-38, doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.08.003.
Marsh, J. E., Perham, N., Sörqvist, P., & Jones, D. M. (2014). Boundaries of semantic distraction:Dominance and lexicality act at retrieval. Memory & Cognition, 42(8), 1285-1301.
Mund, I., Bell, R., & Buchner, A. (2012). Aging and interference in story recall. Experimental Aging Research, 38(1), 20-41, doi:10.1080/0361073X.2012.636724.
Murphy, D. R., Bailey, H., Pearson, M., & Albert, G. (2018). The irrelevant speech effect among younger and older adults:The influence of background noises on reading comprehension. Experimental Aging Research, 44(2), 162-178, doi:10.1080/0361073X.2017.1422561.
Oswald, C. J. P., Tremblay, S., & Jones, D. M. (2000). Disruption of comprehension by the meaning of irrelevant sound. Memory, 8(5), 345-350, doi:10.1080/09658210050117762.
Parsons, T. D., & Barnett, M. (2017). Validity of a newly developed measure of memory:Feasibility study of the virtual environment grocery store. Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, 59(4), 1227-1235, doi:10.3233/JAD-170295.
Potter, L. M., & Grealy, M. A. (2019). Aging and the prevalence of ‘ironic’ action errors under avoidant instruction. PLoS One, 14(3), e0213340, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0213340.
R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria:R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Röer, J. P., Bell, R., Marsh, J. E., & Buchner, A. (2015). Age equivalence in auditory distraction by changing and deviant speech sounds. Psychology and Aging, 30(4), 849-855, doi:10.1037/pag0000055.
Röer, J. P., Körner, U., Buchner, A., & Bell, R. (2017). Attentional capture by taboo words:A functional view of auditory distraction. Emotion, 17(4), 740-750, doi:10.1037/emo0000274.
Rouleau, N., & Belleville, S. (1996). Irrelevant speech effect in aging:An assessment of inhibitory processes in working memory. The Journals of Gerontology. Series B:Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 51(6), 356-363.
Schneider, J. (2002). Vision Chart. Retrieved June 2, 2017, from https://www2.nau.edu/lrm22/lessons/human_senses/images/vision_chart.pdf
Schwarz, H., Schlittmeier, S., Otto, A., Persike, M., Klatte, M., Imhof, M., & Meinhardt-Injac, B. (2015). Age differences in the irrelevant sound effect:A serial recognition paradigm. Psihologija, 48(1), 35-43, doi:10.2298/PSI1501035S.
Sereno, S. C., & Rayner, K. (2000). Spelling-sound regularity effects on eye fixations in reading. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 402-409, doi:10.3758/BF03205559.
Stothart, G., & Kazanina, N. (2016). Auditory perception in the aging brain:The role of inhibition and facilitation in early processing. Neurobiology of Aging, 47, 23-34, doi:10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2016.06.022.
Tremblay, S., Nicholls, A. P., Alford, D., & Jones, D. M. (2000). The irrelevant sound effect:Does speech play a special role? Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(6), 1750-1754, doi:10.1037/0278-7393.26.6.1750.
Tun, P. A., O'Kane, G., & Wingfield, A. (2002). Distraction by competing speech in young and older adult listeners. Psychology and Aging, 17(3), 453-467, doi:10.1037/0882-7974.17.3.453.
van Gerven, P. W. M., & Murphy, D. R. (2010). Aging and distraction by irrelevant speech:Does emotional valence matter? The Journals of Gerontology. Series B:Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 65(6), 667-670.
Wechsler, D., Chen, Y. H., & Chen, X. Y. (2002). WAIS-III Chinese version technical manual. San Antonio, TX:The Psychological Corporation.
Weeks, J. C., Grady, C. L., Hasher, L., & Buchsbaum, B. R. (2020). Holding on to the past:Older adults show lingering neural activation of no-longer-relevant items in working memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 32(10), 1946-1962, doi:10.1162/jocn_a_01596.
Yan, G. L., Meng, Z., Liu, N., He, L. Y., & Paterson, K. B. (2018). Effects of irrelevant background speech on eye movements during reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71(6), 1270-1275, doi:10.1080/17470218.2017.1339718.
Yu, J., Li, J., & Huang, X. (2012). The Beijing version of the montreal cognitive assessment as a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment:A community-based study. BMC Psychiatry, 12(1), 156.

[1]	JIA Ning, RONG Lizhuo, DAI Jinghua. Effects of Social Cues on Explicit and Implicit Metacognitive Monitoring and Control [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(5): 593-599.
[2]	LI Shiyi, XIE Yanfeng, ZHAO Guang, BAI Xuejun. The Influence of Media Multitasking Experience on Implicit Memory in Different Attention Patterns [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(4): 433-440.
[3]	ZHANG Manman, HU Huilan, BIAN Han, LI Fang, ZHANG Zhichao, ZANG Chuanli. Word Frequency Effects in Fast and Slow Readers During Skilled Chinese Reading [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(3): 304-310.
[4]	HE Liyuan, ZHAO Xing, BAI Yu, LIU Nina. Multi-Word Unit Processing for Chinese Older Readers: Evidence from Eye Movements [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(2): 160-166.
[5]	QIN Zhao, WANG Yingchao, YE Jiaying, YUAN Xiaoyuan, YAN Guoli. Visual Compensation in Chinese Deaf Readers’ Sentence Reading: Evidence from Parafoveal-on-Foveal Effect [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(2): 167-173.
[6]	GU Junjuan, GAO Zhihua, MA Shaoyang. The Sub-Word Boundary Effect of Chinese Character Position Processing in Incremental Words [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(1): 1-7.
[7]	CHEN Yantao, GAO Xiaotong, CHEN Zhaolin, HUANG Shihua. Meaning in Life and Mental Health of the Elderly Based on the Dual-Factor Model : Mediating Effects of Attitudes Toward Aging [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2022, 20(1): 88-95.
[8]	ZHAO Sainan, LI Lin, ZHANG Lijuan, WANG Jingxin. The Influence of Constrictive Context on the Processing of Unpredictable Word in Chinese Reading [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(6): 736-742.
[9]	LIU Lu, JIANG Yamei, ZHANG Qiaoming, LI Zhuyang. Influence of the Position and Transparency of Semantic Radicals on Semantic Activation in Chinese Phonogram Recognition [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(5): 585-591.
[10]	LI Sainan, YAN Guoli, WANG Yali, LIU Min, ZHAO Shuping. The Perceptual Span for Chinese Grade 1 Primary School Students [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(5): 606-611.
[11]	ZHANG Suyuan, LAN Zebo, ZHANG Shui, MENG Zhu, YAN Guoli. The Effects of Irrelevant Speech on Reading Among First Graders First-Grade Students: An Eye-Tracking Study [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(4): 433-438,446.
[12]	GAO Xiaolei, SHEN Meng, REN Xiaofei, BAI Xuejun, GAO Lei. The Perceptual Span and Parafoveal Preview Effect of Tibetan-Chinese Readers with High and Low Chinese Level in Reading Chinese [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(3): 297-303,333.
[13]	HE Fei, LIANG Feifei, BAI Xuejun. Semantic Radical Category Consistency Effect in Chinese Incidental Vocabulary Learning [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(3): 304-311.
[14]	KANG Lichao, LAN Zebo, HAN Yinghong. The Effect of Repeated Reading on the 4 to 5 Years Old Children’s Print Attention in Different Reading Styles [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(3): 368-374.
[15]	WU-REN Qimuge, ZHAO Aoxue, WANG Yuhan, ZHUANG Xiangling, MA Guojie. Visual Field Preference and Reference Strategy in Comparative Visual Search [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2021, 19(2): 166-171.