<p><p>Previous research has indicated that meaningful background speech affects individuals reading comprehension performance differently and that this difference is related to working memory capacity. But what mechanism in working memory that is involved is not well understood. The present study’s main purpose was to investigate if individual differences in susceptibility to effects of speech on reading comprehension are moderated by working memory capacity as measured by the number updating task and two different mechanisms within this construct; delayed suppression (i.e. the inhibition of information that once was task-relevant but no longer is) and immediate suppression (i.e. the inhibition of processed but irrelevant information, while withholding attention focused on the to-be-recalled task-relevant items). Forty participants performed a number updating task and a reading comprehension task in silence and with meaningful background speech. The results indicated that the immediate suppression mechanism moderates the effects of background speech on reading comprehension. Those who can’t handle the interference from the background speech let the task-irrelevant information interfere with the ongoing cognitive task and therefore are more likely to be distracted by the background speech while reading a text.</p></p>

Previous research has indicated that meaningful background speech affects individuals reading comprehension performance differently and that this difference is related to working memory capacity. But what mechanism in working memory that is involved is not well understood. The present study’s main purpose was to investigate if individual differences in susceptibility to effects of speech on reading comprehension are moderated by working memory capacity as measured by the number updating task and two different mechanisms within this construct; delayed suppression (i.e. the inhibition of information that once was task-relevant but no longer is) and immediate suppression (i.e. the inhibition of processed but irrelevant information, while withholding attention focused on the to-be-recalled task-relevant items). Forty participants performed a number updating task and a reading comprehension task in silence and with meaningful background speech. The results indicated that the immediate suppression mechanism moderates the effects of background speech on reading comprehension. Those who can’t handle the interference from the background speech let the task-irrelevant information interfere with the ongoing cognitive task and therefore are more likely to be distracted by the background speech while reading a text.

Den här experimentella studien undersökte huruvida man kan skyddas från bakgrundstal genom att använda sig av ett annorlunda teckensnitt än det man vanligtvis läser. Trettiotvå försöksdeltagare deltog i experimentet. Deltagarnas uppgift var att minnas information från texter om två påhittade folkslag som antingen var skriven med ett vanligt teckensnitt (Times New Roman) eller ett annorlunda teckensnitt (Haettenschweiler) i två ljudbetingelser: tystnad och irrelevant bakgrundstal. Resultatet visade att försöksdeltagarnas prestation på läsminnestestet försämrades av bakgrundstalet när texten de skulle minnas var skriven med Times New Roman, men inte när texten var skriven med Haettenschweiler. Det tyder på att man kan skyddas från att bli distraherad av bakgrundstal när man läser kortare texter skrivna med ett annorlunda teckensnitt, vilket kan vara en enkel lösning att använda i ett kontorslandskap. / This experimental study investigated whether a person can be protected from background speech when using of a different font then they usually reads. Thirty-two participants took part in the experiment. The participants' task was to recall information from texts about two fictitious cultures that were either written in a common font (Times New Roman) or in a different font (Haettenschweiler) in two sound conditions: silence and irrelevant background speech. The results showed that the participants' performance deteriorated on the reading memory test when they would remember a text written in Times New Roman, but not when the text was written in Haettenschweiler. This suggests that a person can be protected from background speech while reading shorter texts written in a different font than they usual read, which can be a simple solution to use in an open-plan office.

Background speech is annoying and distracting when working on tasks that require focus, and according to previous research, background speech is a common cause of reduced work performance. According to the interference-by-process theory, distraction is a function of the similarity between the processes involved in the involuntary analysis of the background speech and the voluntary processes involved in the task. In view of this theory, a similarity in language—between the produced language and the language that is listened to—may increase the magnitude of distraction by background chatter in comparison with when the language which is produced is different from the language that is perceived. The purpose of the present experiment was to investigate whether work performance—as indexed by writing fluency (WF)—varies depending on the similarity between the language that is heard in the background and the language that is produced. The experiment had a within-participants design with two factors: language to-be-produced (Swedish vs. English) and language of the background speech (Swedish vs. English). The sample constituted of 43 university students, with Swedish as native language. The result showed a main effect of language to-be-produced: WF increased when the participants produced text in their native language compared to text production in their second language. No main effect of language of background speech was found, and no interaction between these two factors was revealed.