19 Mar 2026
My latest paper with Rob Hughes and colleagues, “High cognitive load abolishes auditory distraction in short-term memory: Implications for working memory-based attentional control and an alternative task-engagement account”, has just been accepted for publication in Journal of Memory and Language. The abstract for the paper is below:
The current study critically examined a common theoretical view in which there exists a distinct working memory (WM) system that not only temporarily stores information but also acts as an attentional controller (the Working Memory—Attentional Control account). A central prediction of this account is that an increase in cognitive load should take up some of the system’s capacity for attentional control and thereby render short-term storage more vulnerable to distraction by task-irrelevant stimuli. The present results directly contradict this prediction: The requirement to engage in an additional concurrent articulation task during short-term serial recall abolished not only the classical changing-state irrelevant sound effect but also attentional capture by an auditory deviant (Experiments 1a and 1b). The deviation effect was also abolished under concurrent articulation in a task involving little if any serial rehearsal (the missing-item task), as indicated independently by the fact this task was immune to a detrimental main effect of concurrent articulation and to a changing-state effect (Experiment 2). We argue that concurrent articulation not only specifically impedes serial rehearsal in the context of serial recall but also imposes a nonspecific cognitive load (regardless of task). However, rather than drain capacity from a distinct WM system, such increased load boosts task engagement which in turn shields performance against forms of distraction that are due to task-disengagement. The task-engagement view may also provide an alternative account of numerous findings that are typically cited in support of the Working Memory—Attentional Control view.
16 Dec 2024
My latest paper with Ben White (University of Western Australia) and Ben Newell (UNSW, Sydney), “Threshold uncertainty, early warning signals, and the prevention of dangerous climate change”, has just been accepted for publication in Royal Society Open Science. The abstract for the paper is below:
The goal of the Paris Agreement is to keep global temperature rise well below 2°C. In this agreement—and its antecedents negotiated in Copenhagen and Cancun—the fear of crossing a dangerous climate threshold is supposed to serve as the catalyst for cooperation amongst countries. However, there are deep uncertainties about the location of the threshold for dangerous climate change, and recent evidence indicates this threshold uncertainty is a major impediment to collective action. Early warning signals of approaching climate thresholds are a potential remedy to this threshold uncertainty problem, and initial experimental evidence suggests such early detection systems may improve the prospects of cooperation. Here, we provide a direct experimental assessment of this early warning signal hypothesis. Using a catastrophe avoidance game, we show that large initial—and subsequently unreduced—threshold uncertainty undermines cooperation, consistent with earlier studies. An early warning signal that reduced uncertainty to within 10% (but not 30%) of the threshold value catalysed cooperation and reduced the probability of catastrophe occurring, albeit not reliably so. Our findings suggest early warning signals can trigger action to avoid a dangerous threshold, but additional mechanisms may be required to foster the cooperation needed to ensure the threshold is not breached.
09 Dec 2024
Along with John Towse, Amy Atkinson, Saturo Saito, and Bob Logie, it is our pleasure to announce that our Special Issue of the Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (QJEP) celebrating 50 years of the Baddeley and Hitch (1974) working memory framework has now been published. Please click here for the list of papers with links for accessing them through the QJEP website.
10 Apr 2024
My latest paper with John Marsh and colleagues, “Changing-state irrelevant speech disrupts visual-verbal but not visual-spatial serial recall”, has just been accepted for publication in Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition. The abstract for the paper is below:
In an influential paper, Jones et al. (1995) provide evidence that auditory distraction by changing relative to repetitive auditory distracters (the changing-state effect) did not differ between a visual-verbal and visual-spatial serial recall task, providing evidence for an amodal mechanism for the representation of serial order in short-term memory that transcends modalities. This finding has been highly influential for theories of short-term memory and auditory distraction. However, evidence vis-à-vis the robustness of this result is sorely lacking. Here, two high-powered replications of Jones et al.’s (1995) crucial Experiment 4 were undertaken. In the first partial replication (n = 64), a fully within-participants design was adopted, wherein participants undertook both the visual-verbal and visual-spatial serial recall tasks under different irrelevant sound conditions, without a retention period. The second near-identical replication (n = 128), incorporated a retention period and implemented the task-modality manipulation as a between-participants factor, as per the original Jones et al. (1995; Experiment 4) study. In both experiments, the changing-state effect was observed for visual-verbal serial recall but not for visual-spatial serial recall. The results are consistent with modular and interference-based accounts of distraction and challenge some aspects of functional equivalence accounts.
19 Dec 2023
My latest paper with Li Qian Tay and colleagues, “Thinking clearly about misinformation”, has just been accepted for publication in Communications Psychology. The abstract for the paper is below:
There is concern that many social problems in Western societies have been caused by misinformation. However, some researchers argue that misinformation is merely a symptom of such problems. We argue that (1) this is a false dichotomy, (2) misinformation has had clear impacts, and (3) researchers should consider the different dimensions of misinformation when making such evaluations.