Claims

Auditory distraction disrupts episodic retrieval equivalently to visual distraction, indicating a domain-general interference effect in long-term memory

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · review r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? Retrieval of relevant visual details declined in the auditory distractor condition relative to no-distractor and control-distractor conditions, mirroring the visual distraction pattern. → Wais 2014 q3 i? A mixed-design ANOVA across the two experiments found no main effect of distractor modality and no condition × modality interaction. → Wais 2014 (2)

Evidence

Wais 2014

Wais, P. E., and Gazzaley, A. (2014). Distractibility during retrieval of long-term memory: domain-general interference, neural networks and increased susceptibility in normal aging. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00280

q3 · i? · review · r2

Behavioral study using written cues to probe recall of visual details during silence, white noise, or ambient café sounds (AD), analyzed in a mixed-design ANOVA with the visual distraction experiment. "retrieval of relevant visual details during the distractor conditions declined"; no effect size printed.

"The results showed a main effect of condition such that retrieval of relevant visual details during the distractor conditions declined relative to both the no distractor and control distractor conditions."

Wais 2014 (2)

Wais, P. E., and Gazzaley, A. (2014). Distractibility during retrieval of long-term memory: domain-general interference, neural networks and increased susceptibility in normal aging. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00280

q3 · i? · review · r2

Direct mixed-design comparison (2 distractor modality × 3 condition ANOVA on conditional correct scores) between the auditory and visual distractor experiments. "no main effect of distractor modality and no interaction"; no effect size printed.

"Critically, there was no main effect of distractor modality and no interaction between condition and distractor modality."

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id auditory-distraction-domain-general-ltm-interference
title Auditory distraction disrupts episodic retrieval equivalently to visual distraction, indicating a domain-general interference effect in long-term memory
description Auditory distraction disrupts episodic retrieval equivalently to visual distraction, indicating a domain-general interference effect in long-term memory
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2014
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-17
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 2 — wais-2014, wais-2014-2

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.