An experiment examined performance with sonifications—a general term for nonspeech auditory displays—as a function of working memory encoding and the demands of three different types of interference tasks. Participants encoded the sonifications as verbal representations, visuospatial images, or auditory images. After encoding, participants engaged in brief verbal, visuospatial, or auditory interference tasks before responding to point estimation queries about the sonifications. Results were expected to show selective impact on sonification task performance when the interference task demands matched the working memory encoding strategy, but instead a pattern of general working memory interference emerged in addition to auditory modal interference. In practical applications, results suggested that performance with auditory displays will be impacted by any interference task, though auditory tasks likely will cause more interference than verbal or visuospatial tasks.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BonebrightT.NeesM. A. (2009). Most earcons do not interfere with spoken passage comprehension. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23(3), 431–445.
2.
CocchiniG.LogieR. H.Della SallaS.MacPhersonS. E.BaddeleyA. (2002). Concurrent performance of two memory tasks: Evidence for domain-specific working memory systems. Memory & Cognition, 30(7), 1086–1095.
3.
DeutschD. (1970). Tones and numbers: Specificity of interference in immediate memory. Science, 168(3939), 1604.
4.
HartS. G.StavelandL. E. (1988). Development of the NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In HancockP. A.MeshkatiN. (Eds.), Human Mental Workload (pp. 239–250). Amsterdam: North Holland Press.
5.
KosslynS. M.BallT. M.ReiserB. J. (1978). Visual images preserve metric spatial information: Evidence from studies of image scanning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4(1), 47–60.
6.
KramerG.WalkerB. N.BonebrightT.CookP.FlowersJ.MinerN.TipeiS. (1999). The Sonification Report: Status of the Field and Research Agenda. Report prepared for the National Science Foundation by members of the International Community for Auditory Display.
7.
LogieR. H.Della SallaS.LaiaconaM.ChalmersP.WynnV. (1996). Group aggregates and individual reliability: The case of verbal short-term memory. Memory & Cognition, 24(3), 305–321.
8.
MacLeodC. M.HuntE. B.MathewsN. N. (1978). Individual differences in the verification of sentence-picture relationships. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17(5), 493–507.
9.
MathewsN. N.HuntE. B.MacLeodC. M. (1980). Strategy choice and strategy training in sentence-picture verification. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19(5), 531–548.
10.
MoreyC. C.CowanN. (2004). When visual and verbal memories compete: Evidence of cross-domain limits in working memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11(2), 296–301.
11.
NeesM. A.WalkerB. N. (2008). Encoding and representation of information in auditory graphs: Descriptive reports of listener strategies for understanding data. In International Conference on Auditory Display (ICAD 08).
12.
NeesM. A.WalkerB. N. (2011a). Auditory displays for in-vehicle technologies. In DeluciaP. (Ed.), Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics (pp. 58–99). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing/Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
13.
NeesM. A.WalkerB. N. (2011b). Mental scanning of sonifcations reveals flexible encoding of nonspeech sounds and a universal per-item scanning cost. Acta Psychologica, 137, 309–317.
14.
NeesM. A.WalkerB. N. (2013). Flexibility of working memory encoding in a sentence-picture-sound verification task. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25(7), 800–807.
15.
OgdenG. D.LevineJ. M.EisnerE. J. (1979). Measurement of workload by secondary tasks. Human Factors, 21(5), 529–548.
16.
PetersM.BattistaC. (2008). Applications of mental rotation figures of the Shepard and Metzler type and description of a mental rotation stimulus library. Brain and Cognition, 66(3), 260–264.
17.
SandersonP. M. (2006). The multimodal world of medical monitoring displays. Applied Ergonomics, 37, 501–512.
18.
SarnoK. J.WickensC. D. (1995). Role of multiple resources in predicting time-sharing efficiency: Evaluation of three workload models in a multiple-task setting. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 5(1), 107–130.
StokesA.WickensC. D.KiteK. (1990). Auditory displays. In Display Technology: Human Factors Concepts (pp. 47–64). Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers.
21.
TsangP.WilsonG. (1997). Mental workload. In SalvendyG. (Ed.), Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics (2nd ed.) (pp. 417– 489). New York: Wiley.
22.
VergauweE.BarrouilletP.CamosV. (2010). Do mental processes share a domain-general resource?Psychological Science, 21(384-390).
23.
WickensC. D. (1984). Processing resources in attention. In ParasuramanR.DaviesD. R. (Eds.), Varieties of Attention (pp. 63–102). New York: Academic Press.
24.
WickensC. D. (2002). Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 3(2), 159–177.
25.
WickensC. D.LiuY. (1988). Codes and modalities in multiple resources: A success and a qualification. Human Factors, 30(5), 599–616.
