Abstract
Previous experiments have shown that during performance of a shadowing task the unattended message is processed at a semantic level. Four experiments are reported that deal with the question of how processing of the unattended message influences the difficulty of shadowing the attended message. Experiment I demonstrated that pupil dilation measures the difficulty associated with a shadowing task. In Experiment II it was shown that during shadowing of 20-item lists pupil dilation decreases as shadowing continues when either words or white noise are in the unattended channel. These results support the idea that it takes time for the attentional mechanism to focus on the attended message. In Experiments III and IV it was found that this decrease in difficulty of shadowing is much less when the attended and unattended messages come from the same stimulus category (letter-letter, digit-digit). The results indicate that, when the unattended message is from the same stimulus category as the attended message, it can interfere with the ability of the attentional system to focus on the attended message.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Beatty, J., &Kahneman, D. Pupillary changes in two memory tasks.Psychonomic Science, 1966.5, 371–372.
Corteen, R. S., &Dunn, D. Shock-associated words in a nonattended message: A test for momentary awareness.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1974,102, 1143–1144.
Corteen, R. S., &Wood, B. Autonomic responses to shock-associated words in an unattended channel.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1972,94, 308–313.
Deutsch, J. A., &Deutsch, D. Attention: Some theoretical considerations.Psychological Review, 1963,70, 80–90.
Goldwater, B. C. Psychological significance of pupillary movements.Psychological Bulletin, 1972,77. 340–355.
Hess, E. H., &Polt, J. M. Pupil size in relation to mental activity during simple problem-solving.Science, 1964,143, 1190–1192.
Kahneman, D.Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall, 1973.
Kahneman, D., &Beatty, J. Pupil diameter and load on memory.Science, 1966,154, 1583–1585.
Lewis, J. Semantic processing of unattended messages using dichotic listening.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970,85, 225–228.
Moray, N. Attention in dichotic listening. Affective cues and the influence of instructions.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1959,11, 56–60.
Morton, J. Interaction of information in word recognition.Psychological Review, 1969,76, 165–178.
Treisman, A. M. Strategies and models of selective attention.Psychological Review, 1969,76, 282–299.
Treisman, A. M., Squire, R., &Green, J. Semantic processes in dichotic listening? A replication.Memory & Cognition, 1974,2, 641–646.
Zelniker, T. Perceptual attenuation of an irrelevant auditory verbal response in a selective attention task.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1971,87, 52–56.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by funds provided by the Organized Research Committee of the University of Texas at Arlington
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ambler, B.A., Fisicaro, S.A. & Proctor, R.W. Temporal characteristics of primary-secondary message interference in a dichotic listening task. Memory & Cognition 4, 709–716 (1976). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213238
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213238