Reverberation exacerbates effects of interruption on auditory spatial selective attention

preprint OA: closed
Full text JSON View at publisher

Abstract

Everyday listening requires focusing on one talker while ignoring competing sounds, a process challenged by reverberation and unexpected distractions. Here, we asked whether reverberation decreases effects of distractions by reducing the salience of new onsets, or compounds disruption by increasing task difficulty. Across five online experiments, participants recalled spatialized syllable streams presented with or without interrupters under pseudo-anechoic and reverberant conditions. Interrupters consistently impaired recall, especially the syllables following the interrupter. For the syllable immediately after the interruption, this effect was larger in reverberation than in anechoic conditions. These results demonstrate that distractions are especially disruptive in reverberant settings.
Full text 1,020 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Abstract Everyday listening requires focusing on one talker while ignoring competing sounds, a process challenged by reverberation and unexpected distractions. Here, we asked whether reverberation decreases effects of distractions by reducing the salience of new onsets, or compounds disruption by increasing task difficulty. Across five online experiments, participants recalled spatialized syllable streams presented with or without interrupters under pseudo-anechoic and reverberant conditions. Interrupters consistently impaired recall, especially the syllables following the interrupter. For the syllable immediately after the interruption, this effect was larger in reverberation than in anechoic conditions. These results demonstrate that distractions are especially disruptive in reverberant settings. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. Footnotes vif{at}andrew.cmu.edu, wushengl{at}andrew.cmu.edu, sahil.luthra{at}stonybrook.edu, cb43{at}usf.edu, bgsc{at}andrew.cmu.edu

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00