Cited by 21Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismMultisensory perception and integrationNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Why Does Language Interfere with Vision-Based Tasks?

Almor, Amit·2008·Experimental Psychology

Abstract

Conversation with a remote person can interfere with performing vision-based tasks. Two experiments tested the role of general executive resources and spatial attentional resources in this interference. Both experiments assessed performance in vision-based tasks as participants engaged in a language task involving a virtual remote speaker. In both experiments, the language task interfered with the vision task more when participants were speaking or planning what to say next than when they were listening. In Experiment 1, speaking or planning what to say next were also associated with higher interference from a visual distractor than listening, indicating that preparing to speak and speaking pose higher executive requirements than listening. In both experiments, localizing the voice of the remote speaker to the front of participants slightly reduced interference in comparison to other directions. This suggests that remote conversation requires spatial attention resources for representing the position of the remote person.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1027/1618-3169.55.4.260

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Under dual-task conditions, performance in the linguistic and/or motor task is typically worse than when each task is performed alone.

    “Under such dual-task conditions performance in the linguistic or/and motor task is typically worse than when each task is performed by itself.”

    From Timing in Conversation (2023) · cites this paper as Almor, 2008

  • Both listening and speaking require some attention.

    “numerous studies have shown that both listening and speaking require some attention.”

    From Timing in Conversation (2023) · cites this paper as Almor, 2008

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Almor, A.
Affiliations
University of South Carolina (US)
Corresponding author
Almor, Amit
Venue
Experimental Psychology
Published
2008-01
Volume
55
Issue
4
Pages
260-268
ISSN
  • 0949-3964 (ISSN-L)
  • 1618-3169
  • 2190-5142
OpenAlex
W2157333157
Cited by
20
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
FWCI
0.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Experimental Psychology (formerly Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of South Carolina
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
language transfer, executive function, spatial attention, visual distractors, speech preparation, dual-task interference
MeSH terms
Adult, Attention, Female, Humans, Language, Male, Visual Perception

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review