↓ Skip to main content

The effects of distraction on metacognition and metacognition on distraction: evidence from recognition memory

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The effects of distraction on metacognition and metacognition on distraction: evidence from recognition memory
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00439
Pubmed ID
Authors

C. Philip Beaman, Maciej Hanczakowski, Dylan M. Jones

Abstract

The effects of auditory distraction in memory tasks have, to date, been examined with procedures that minimize participants' control over their own memory processes. Surprisingly little attention has been paid to metacognitive control factors which might affect memory performance. In this study, we investigate the effects of auditory distraction on metacognitive control of memory, examining the effects of auditory distraction in recognition tasks utilizing the metacognitive framework of Koriat and Goldsmith (1996), to determine whether strategic regulation of memory accuracy is impacted by auditory distraction. Results replicated previous findings in showing that auditory distraction impairs memory performance in tasks minimizing participants' metacognitive control (forced-report test). However, the results revealed also that when metacognitive control is allowed (free-report tests), auditory distraction impacts upon a range of metacognitive indices. In the present study, auditory distraction undermined accuracy of metacognitive monitoring (resolution), reduced confidence in responses provided and, correspondingly, increased participants' propensity to withhold responses in free-report recognition. Crucially, changes in metacognitive processes were related to impairment in free-report recognition performance, as the use of the "don't know" option under distraction led to a reduction in the number of correct responses volunteered in free-report tests. Overall, the present results show how auditory distraction exerts its influence on memory performance via both memory and metamemory processes.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
France 1 1%
Unknown 73 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 16%
Student > Master 11 15%
Researcher 6 8%
Professor 5 7%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 13 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 40 53%
Engineering 4 5%
Neuroscience 4 5%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Mathematics 2 3%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 14 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 May 2014.
All research outputs
#19,102,180
of 24,323,543 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,441
of 32,736 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,724
of 231,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#261
of 332 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,323,543 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,736 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 231,631 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 332 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.