Introduction Results

Discussion

References

Kelly Allen, Tamiko Azuma, & Karen PittengerArizona State University

Procedure

Participants

Thirteen military veterans currently enrolled at Arizona State University, community college, or

college preparatory programs, participated in this study. All participants completed a questionnaire

which included questions about their academic, medical, and military service history. Eight typical

veterans reported no history of mTBI or concussion (Mean age = 29.6 yrs, SD=3.6) and five

veterans reported a history of mTBI or concussion (Mean age = 31.2 yrs, SD=4.0). All participants

spoke English fluently and provided informed consent prior to participating in the study. The

participants were administered the Rey’s Auditory Verbal Learning Task (Schmidt, 1996) as part of

a larger test battery.

Rey’s Auditory Verbal Learning Task

• What is the effect of auditory distraction on verbal memory performance in military veterans?

• Does auditory distraction affect verbal memory in veterans with mTBI more than typical veterans?

An increasing number of military veterans are enrolling in college and/or transitioning into the

civilian workforce. Because of the nature of their military service, veterans are at a higher risk for

service-related conditions, including mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), post-traumatic stress

disorder (PTSD), and social anxiety disorder. Mild TBI is of particular concern because the

condition can go undiagnosed, yet the cognitive consequences can be significant. Common

cognitive problems associated with mTBI are deficits in attention, working memory, and episodic

memory. One challenge in evaluating veterans with mTBI is that their cognitive deficits may be

relatively subtle, only arising under more demanding circumstances. Although clinical cognitive

assessment is performed in controlled settings, situations in classrooms and work settings usually

involve the processing of complex information under distracting situations. This study examined

how verbal memory is affected by auditory distraction in veterans with and without mTBI.

Although auditory distraction affected verbal memory in both typical veterans and veterans with

mTBI, the groups showed different performance patterns. For typical veterans, the effect of

distraction on memory interacted with Trial type, which reflected the fact that distraction affected

performance only in the delayed recall condition. For veterans with mTBI, the effect size of auditory

distraction on verbal memory was large, with distraction detrimentally affecting performance across

all trial types. Overall, the results indicate that auditory distraction disrupts verbal memory retrieval

more in veterans with mTBI relative to veteran peers with no mTBI. Data collection for this study is

ongoing and larger sample sizes will allow for stronger hypothesis testing.

Research Questions

Method

The Effect of Auditory Distraction on Verbal Memory

in Military Veterans with and without mTBI

The examiner reads a

list of 15 words.

The participant recalls

the words in any order.

Trials 1 through 4

The examiner reads a

different list of 15

words.

The participant recalls

the words in any order.

The participant

recalls the original

list of 15 words.

Intervening List Delayed Recall

20 minutes

Distraction Conditions

No Distraction

Words recalled with

no noise

Auditory Distraction

Words recalled with

multi-talker babble

played over

headphones

LIST ADRUM

CURTAINBELL

COFFEESCHOOLPARENTMOON

GARDENHAT

FARMERNOSE

TURKEYCOLORHOUSERIVER

LIST BDESK

RANGERBIRDSHOESTOVE

MOUNTAINGLASSESTOWELCLOUDBOATLAMBGUN

PENCILCHURCH

RISH

LIST ADRUM

CURTAINBELL

COFFEESCHOOLPARENTMOON

GARDENHAT

FARMERNOSE

TURKEYCOLORHOUSERIVER

The data analyses focused on the proportion of words correctly recalled across the trials and

distraction conditions. Given the small sample sizes (and low degrees of freedom), effect sizes were

evaluated using partial eta-squared (2) following Cohen’s (1988) interpretation.

3 (Trial) X 2 (Distraction) Analysis of Variance

Effect of Trial (F(2,14) = 7.66, p<.01, partial 2 = .52): large effect size

Effect of Distraction (F(1, 7) = 1.10, p=.33, partial 2 = .14: medium effect size

Test X Distraction Interaction F(2,14) = 1.36, p=.29, partial 2 = .16: medium effect size

3(Trial) X 2 (Distraction) Analysis of Variance

Effect of Trial (F(2,8) = 11.56, p<.01, partial 2 = .74): large effect size

Effect of Distraction (F(1, 4) = 4.94, p=.09, partial 2 = .55): large effect size

Test X Distraction Interaction (F<1, partial 2 = .02): no effect

Cohen, J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Schmidt M. (1996). Rey Auditory and Verbal Learning Test: A Handbook. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services, 1996.