Show simple item record

dc.contributor.supervisorHollins, Timothy J
dc.contributor.authorRae, Pamela J L
dc.contributor.otherFaculty of Healthen_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-02T09:03:50Z
dc.date.available2019-09-02T09:03:50Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier10079687en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/14850
dc.description.abstract

This thesis aims to provide further understanding of how visual distraction disrupts retrieval from long-term memory. Eyewitness testimony research shows a fairly consistent picture: visual distraction (or its removal though eye-closure) decreases retrieval-accuracy of details embedded in an event. However, research on verbal memory suggest that distraction effects may be selective: Glenberg, Schroeder and Robertson’s (1998) widely cited study found distraction to impair recall of mid-list words from multiple word-lists but Rae’s (2011) single word-list studies found no such effect. The investigation thus began with a part-replication of Glenberg et al. with tighter control of materials including using Dynamic Visual Noise (DVN) as a distraction. Experiment 1 replicated the findings on mid-list recall. Experiments 2 and 3 investigated whether the effect on mid-list words was due to poor encoding or interference however, found no detrimental effect of distraction on word-recall whatsoever. Experiment 4 confirmed that DVN does impair retrieval accuracy for an event. Therefore, the focus of the thesis moved to exploring whether distraction selectively impairs cognitive processes involved in event but not word-list retrieval. Experiments 5 and 6 manipulated Experiment 4’s event so that the original video-clip became more like a list. Together with the serial presentation of details in Experiments 7 and 8, these studies explored four possible moderators of distraction: modality of detail; bimodal presentation; source monitoring; flowing movement. A meta-analysis of effect sizes showed visual distraction to have stronger detrimental effects on recall of flowing visual details. This is explained by both the Cognitive Resources Framework (Vredeveldt, 2011) and Event Segmentation Theory (Zacks & Swallow, 2007) which together imply that visual distraction may disrupt memory by selectively impairing visual-spatial imagery.

en_US
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherUniversity of Plymouth
dc.subjectVisual distractionen_US
dc.subjectMemoryen_US
dc.subjectEmbodied memoryen_US
dc.subjectDynamic visual noiseen_US
dc.subjectWord-list recallen_US
dc.subjectEvent recallen_US
dc.subjectEpisodic memoryen_US
dc.subject.classificationPhDen_US
dc.titleThe effect of visual distraction on memory for words, pictures and complex eventsen_US
dc.typeThesis
plymouth.versionpublishableen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.24382/946
dc.rights.embargoperiodNo embargoen_US
dc.type.qualificationDoctorateen_US
rioxxterms.versionNA
plymouth.orcid.idhttp://orcid.org/0000-0003-0370-6570en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV