View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Distraction across Languages: The Impact of Background Music Lyrics on First- and Second Language Reading

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Distraction across Languages: The Impact of Background Music Lyrics on First- and Second Language Reading
Language: English
Authors: Yilun Ding (ORCID 0009-0009-0492-989X), William Choi (ORCID 0000-0001-7981-7782)
Source: Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2025 39(4).
Availability: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 7
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Foreign Countries, Sino Tibetan Languages, English (Second Language), Native Language, Reading Processes, Attention Control, Music, Poetry, Reading Comprehension, Study Habits, Semantics, Interference (Learning), Silent Reading, Accuracy, Auditory Discrimination
Geographic Terms: China
DOI: 10.1002/acp.70104
ISSN: 0888-4080
1099-0720
Abstract: Background music with lyrics can be a prevalent distraction in environments where people study or read while music plays. However, such effects on reading comprehension across different language contexts remain insufficiently investigated. Guided by the duplex-mechanism account of auditory distraction and the semantic-interference hypothesis, the current study explores the graded interaction of background music lyrics and task language on reading comprehension performance among Cantonese ESL learners. Ninety-five Cantonese ESL learners will be tested on L1 and L2 reading comprehension tasks under a silent condition and three background music conditions: L1, L2, and foreign. We will measure reading comprehension accuracy and the time taken to read each passage. By systematically examining cross-language auditory distraction in reading comprehension, the current study could potentially refine theoretical accounts of auditory distraction and optimize learning environments for L2 learners.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1481517
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwHjv5n_NaJlZOIgLwIQZ9TxAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDPZgUOreysHl-_34dQIBEICBmz_DuUsJDTiLAP6vnbJtKFu-j8hIyguhOKAyveTuvtozA0wexwgstzs7knKJ4Elvgd7O_N9y8qAZvQiZCQyTkdCJbKTaYU8Tq4gGILTsfu_UuFPy131qLuw4DFGAE6YyTy7drI8C17W0w9Y3YH9tY6ALyV0OR5YfgtRQgpPTUIz7JnCShMiMMna9sXGYV6o1ydSH6L2sikUSRKZi
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0187503631;bu801jul.25;2025Aug26.05:06;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0187503631-1">Distraction Across Languages: The Impact of Background Music Lyrics on First‐ and Second Language Reading </title> <p>Background music with lyrics can be a prevalent distraction in environments where people study or read while music plays. However, such effects on reading comprehension across different language contexts remain insufficiently investigated. Guided by the duplex‐mechanism account of auditory distraction and the semantic‐interference hypothesis, the current study explores the graded interaction of background music lyrics and task language on reading comprehension performance among Cantonese ESL learners. Ninety‐five Cantonese ESL learners will be tested on L1 and L2 reading comprehension tasks under a silent condition and three background music conditions: L1, L2, and foreign. We will measure reading comprehension accuracy and the time taken to read each passage. By systematically examining cross‐language auditory distraction in reading comprehension, the current study could potentially refine theoretical accounts of auditory distraction and optimize learning environments for L2 learners.</p> <p>Keywords: auditory distraction; background music; interference‐by‐process; reading comprehension; semantic interference</p> <p>Auditory distractions have been identified as a common variable affecting cognitive tasks, including various recall tasks, recognition tasks (Lecompte [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref1">12</reflink>]; Marsh et al. [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref2">13</reflink>]), the Stroop task (Cassidy and MacDonald [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref3">1</reflink>]), and reading comprehension (Hao and Conway [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref4">9</reflink>]; Sörqvist et al. [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref5">17</reflink>]). To account for the dynamics of these effects, the duplex‐mechanism account of auditory distraction proposes that auditory distractions influence cognitive tasks via two pathways: interference‐by‐process and attentional capture (Marsh et al. [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref6">13</reflink>]). Interference‐by‐process occurs when the sound disrupts the specific cognitive process required for the task by competing for processing resources. As a source of auditory distraction, background music may also interfere with cognitive task performance. Given that it is common for students to study while listening to music with lyrics (Kotsopoulou and Hallam [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref7">11</reflink>]), many studies have explored the impact of background music on reading comprehension performance. Theoretically grounded in the interference‐by‐process hypothesis, some studies have looked into semantic distraction from music's lyrics and its impact on second‐language learners (e.g., Chew et al. [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref8">2</reflink>]; Quan and Kuo [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref9">15</reflink>]; Sun et al. [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref10">18</reflink>]). Noticeably, past studies have primarily focused on comparing a silent context with a music‐playing context or, at most, comparing background music in no more than two different languages, thus missing the opportunity to examine whether interference‐by‐process can be viewed as a continuum across different language contexts. Given that individuals' familiarity with a language can vary along a continuum, it is possible that the effects of interference‐by‐process also lie on such a continuum. To extend existing literature and theoretical models while considering second‐language learners, the current study aims to compare the graded effects of background music in different languages on both L1 and L2 reading comprehension performance, measured by reading comprehension accuracy and reading comprehension time. Here, graded effects refer to a continuum of interference levels, where the degree of disruption varies depending on the relative familiarity of the lyrics' language.</p> <hd id="AN0187503631-2">Theoretical Accounts</hd> <p>According to the duplex‐mechanism account of auditory distraction, distraction can occur through two processes: interference‐by‐process and attentional capture (Hughes [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref11">10</reflink>]). Interference‐by‐process happens when the cognitive processes involved in the primary task and the distracting stimulus overlap. If the task and the auditory distraction require similar cognitive resources, the distraction competes for those resources, resulting in interference and detriment to task performance (Hughes [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref12">10</reflink>]). Referring to a common practice of studying while listening to music, when song lyrics are processed semantically, they can compete with the same semantic processing required for understanding the text being read (Vasilev et al. [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref13">19</reflink>]). This overlap can interfere with readers' ability to sufficiently comprehend the study material. The other mechanism, attentional capture, refers to situations where attention is temporarily diverted from the primary task (Hughes [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref14">10</reflink>]). As an example, hearing one's name being called in the middle of reading is a case reflecting attentional capture.</p> <p>As Vasilev et al. ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref15">20</reflink>]) pointed out, the prediction from the interference‐by‐process mechanism is consistent with the semantic‐interference hypothesis (Martin et al. [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref16">14</reflink>]) in the case of reading comprehension while listening to music with lyrics. Specifically, Martin et al. ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref17">14</reflink>]) found that intelligible background speech was more distracting than unintelligible speech in terms of reading comprehension, while instrumental music was not more distracting than a silent background. Here, intelligible speech refers to clear and meaningful speech that listeners could understand, thereby engaging cognitive resources through its semantic content. This revealed that the semantic properties of the background, rather than the phonological properties, are the key factor causing disruption to reading comprehension. Martin et al. ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref18">14</reflink>]) suggested that the nature of reading comprehension requires understanding the meaning of the text. That is, reading comprehension while listening to music with lyrics implies that the semantic processing of the background is inevitably competing with the development of the meaning representation for the material being read (Martin et al. [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref19">14</reflink>]).</p> <p>Why would L2 lyrics affect L1 reading comprehension? The Multilink model suggests that lexical access in bilinguals is language non‐selective, which means lexical items from both languages can be activated simultaneously to affect task performance (Dijkstra et al. [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref20">6</reflink>]). Indeed, Sandoval et al. ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref21">16</reflink>]) found that English‐dominant bilinguals performed worse on English semantic and letter fluency tasks compared to English monolingual speakers, evidenced by lower response correctness, slower first response times, and proportionally delayed retrieval. Sandoval et al. ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref22">16</reflink>]) pointed out that these differences imply that bilinguals' processing of L2 influences the responses they produce in L1 verbal fluency tests. This processing involves dual‐language lexical activation, defined as the concurrent activation of lexical items from both L1 and L2 during language production. Sandoval et al. ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref23">16</reflink>]) suggest that even when bilinguals are required to use their dominant language, the non‐dominant language remains active and can interfere with lexical selection, thus influencing performance. Like verbal fluency tests, reading comprehension also engages lexical activation. It is thus reasonable to predict that bilinguals' L2 processing will likely affect their L1 reading comprehension as well.</p> <p>Complementing the evidence of dual‐language lexical activation (Sandoval et al. [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref24">16</reflink>]), Francis and Gutiérrez ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref25">8</reflink>]) further illustrate how language proficiency and processing depth shape cognitive performance. Their study revealed that bilinguals exhibited higher hit rates and faster responses for shallowly encoded words in their less fluent language compared to their dominant language. This implies for bilingual speakers that the semantic activation invoked in L2 is less robust than that in L1, suggesting less interference when background music lyrics are processed in L2 compared to in L1. In contrast, when the lyrics are presented in L1, the resulting strong semantic activation can overlap substantially with the deep semantic processing required during reading comprehension, thereby intensifying cognitive interference. Moreover, lyrics in an unfamiliar language are expected to trigger minimal semantic activation, leading to the least interference. Together, these findings suggest that the interference‐by‐process mechanism may operate along a continuum determined by language familiarity, with higher semantic overlap elicited by native‐language lyrics yielding greater disruption in reading comprehension performance.</p> <hd id="AN0187503631-3">Background Music as a Semantic Distraction</hd> <p>Theories predicting that semantically intelligible auditory distractions disrupt reading comprehension performance are supported by meta‐analytic evidence. Specifically, Vasilev et al. ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref26">20</reflink>]) reveal that when considering 65 studies on auditory distractions in reading comprehension, intelligible speech and lyrical music resulted in the greatest distraction, compared to other background noises, speech, or music. In other words, a song in a reader's native language tends to result in a higher degree of distraction compared to the same song in a foreign language, given that the lyrics are more intelligible to the reader (Vasilev et al. [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref27">20</reflink>]). Additional studies, such as Vasilev et al. ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref28">19</reflink>]), further suggest that when matching intelligible speech and lyrical music on language rate, they were equally distracting for reading comprehension. This not only confirms findings from Vasilev et al. ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref29">20</reflink>]) but also strengthens the causal effect of background music on reading comprehension, as it adopts an experimental rather than merely observational approach.</p> <p>Vasilev et al. ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref30">20</reflink>]) concluded by calling for an investigation of distractions caused by intelligible speech and music with lyrics in second‐language learners to determine how language proficiency impacts semantic interference. Indeed, recent studies such as Quan and Kuo ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref31">15</reflink>]) and Sun et al. ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref32">18</reflink>]) have explored the distraction caused by lyrics in either Chinese or English on readers' Chinese reading comprehension performance. Specifically, Quan and Kuo ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref33">15</reflink>]) found that for Chinese ESL learners, their Chinese reading comprehension performance was negatively affected by listening to music with English lyrics but not by music with Chinese lyrics. Those with better English listening ability yielded higher Chinese reading comprehension efficiency when listening to background music with English lyrics. These findings seem inconsistent with predictions from both the interference‐by‐process and semantic‐interference hypotheses. Quan and Kuo ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref34">15</reflink>]) attributed this mismatch to the reduced reliance on semantic information when processing L1 lyrics and recommended future studies to confirm this observation.</p> <p>Contrasting Quan and Kuo ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref35">15</reflink>]), Sun et al. ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref36">18</reflink>]) examined how L1 and L2 lyrics in background music influence reading comprehension and yet supported both the interference‐by‐process hypothesis and the semantic‐interference hypothesis. In their study, researchers found that both Chinese and English reading comprehension performances were hindered by popular music that shared the same language as the written text (Sun et al. [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref37">18</reflink>]). Notably, the study included conditions of no music, L1 lyrics, and L2 lyrics but did not include a foreign language lyrics condition. The proposed study aims to address this gap, as examining how foreign language lyrics impact reading comprehension performance holds both practical significance, given people's expanded music choices, and theoretical importance in broadening the understanding of interference‐by‐process and whether such mechanisms extend beyond a binary or categorical context.</p> <p>Chew et al. ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref38">2</reflink>]) examined the semantic distraction from music's lyrics within the domain of music language familiarity and found that lyrics in participants' native language led to greater distraction as compared to a foreign, unintelligible version of the same song, confirming the semantic‐interference hypothesis. However, this effect was observed only in a word memory task and not in a reading comprehension task. The current study aims to reexamine whether these effects are detectable in reading comprehension performance, with the context of background music being more thoroughly examined. Moreover, given the between‐subject design, individual differences such as arousal levels, which are linked to cognitive performance, were not fully controlled for in Chew et al. ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref39">2</reflink>]). The current study seeks to address the above limitations and provide a more comprehensive analysis in this field with our study design.</p> <hd id="AN0187503631-4">The Gap: Graded Effects of Background Music Lyrics</hd> <p>As a recap, past literature has focused on comparing how reading comprehension is affected by L1 lyrics and L2 lyrics, or L1 lyrics and foreign lyrics, without fully integrating these comparisons in one experimental design. Evidence from Chew et al. ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref40">2</reflink>]) and Sun et al. ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref41">18</reflink>]) has suggested that background music lyrics can affect cognitive tasks, with lyrics in background music appearing to have a graded interference effect that varies based on the language context. Both the interference‐by‐process hypothesis and semantic‐interference hypothesis agree that L1 background lyrics may compete with reading comprehension in the same language due to overlapping semantic processing demands. It is therefore reasonable to suggest a continuum characteristic of such an interference theory, where interference gradually increases as background music lyrics move from foreign language to L2 to L1, with L1 lyrics causing the most significant distraction for L1 reading comprehension. The possibility of constructing this continuum is also supported by Francis and Gutiérrez ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref42">8</reflink>]) and Vasilev et al. ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref43">20</reflink>]), both suggesting that certain factors, such as language familiarity or cognitive load, might differentially influence distraction effects.</p> <p>Given the importance of how different language contexts influence auditory distraction, it is crucial to examine how background music in different languages may regulate semantic distraction degrees in reading comprehension performance, and specifically in both reading comprehension accuracy and reading comprehension time. The current study would contribute novel insights to both auditory distraction research and L2 reading comprehension performance studies. It offers a comprehensive exploration of how different language contexts affect cognitive load during reading comprehension, thereby potentially disclosing a more gradual continuum of distraction rather than a dichotomous effect. Furthermore, while past studies have predominantly focused on L1 reading comprehension performance, the growing number of second‐language learners today makes this investigation highly relevant. By considering how varying background music lyrics affect L2 reading comprehension, this study offers practical significance.</p> <p>Based on both the duplex‐mechanism account of auditory distraction and the semantic interference accounts, we hypothesize that for Cantonese ESL learners, Cantonese background music will cause greater disruption in L1 reading comprehension tasks than L2 or foreign music lyrics, projecting a gradual effect of background music lyrics on L1 reading comprehension. L2 background music lyrics, although potentially less disruptive in L1 reading comprehension, may still impact L2 reading comprehension due to not only the cognitive load of decoding lyrics in a non‐native language but also the overlap in semantic processing demands as discussed in Martin et al. ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref44">14</reflink>]). Hence, for L2 reading comprehension, we expect that music will hinder reading comprehension performance, resulting in longer completion time and lower accuracy, with a gradual effect moving from L2 to L1 to foreign music, as the level of disruption increases.</p> <hd id="AN0187503631-5">Current Study</hd> <p>Although previous studies have demonstrated the effects of background music on reading comprehension performance, the findings have been inconsistent (e.g., Chew et al. [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref45">2</reflink>]; Quan and Kuo [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref46">15</reflink>]; Sun et al. [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref47">18</reflink>]). What's more, while literature compares how reading comprehension is affected by L1 lyrics and L2 lyrics, or L1 lyrics and foreign lyrics, no study has fully integrated these comparisons in one experimental design. A thorough examination of whether and how such effects form a continuum is thus needed. To address this gap, we will systematically compare the effects of background music with L1, L2, and foreign language lyrics on both L1 and L2 reading comprehension performance.</p> <p>According to the interference‐by‐process and semantic‐interference hypotheses, semantically processable auditory distractions are expected to interfere with reading comprehension performance. Given how bilinguals' L2 processing exerts negative effects on L1 verbal fluency due to poorer lexical activation (Sandoval et al. [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref48">16</reflink>]), such L2 processing may also affect their L1 reading comprehension performance. Based on this, we hypothesize that for Cantonese ESL learners, L1 background music will cause more significant disruption in L1 reading comprehension tasks than L2 or foreign music lyrics, resulting in more completion time and lower accuracy. Furthermore, we predict a gradual increase in the level of distraction from foreign language to L2 to L1 in L1 reading comprehension, with L1 background music causing the greatest disruption. For L2 reading comprehension, we hypothesize that background music with lyrics will hinder reading comprehension performance and result in more completion time and lower accuracy, with a similar graded effect, increasing from L2 to L1 to foreign music as the level of disruption intensifies. We also include a silent condition to establish a baseline of reading comprehension performance in the absence of auditory distractions.</p> <p>To test our hypothesis, we will adopt a within‐subject design to compare Cantonese ESL learners' reading comprehension performance across four conditions: no music, L1 background music (Cantonese), L2 background music (English), and foreign language background music (Spanish). Considering the increasing prevalence of ESL learners, we are particularly interested in how these effects might extend to L2 reading comprehension. Thus, we will test the effects on both L1 and L2 reading comprehension performance. If our hypothesis holds, we expect Cantonese ESL learners to achieve the highest L1 reading comprehension scores and the shortest completion times in the no music condition, relatively high scores and short times when listening to Spanish background music, moderate scores and times with English background music, and the lowest scores and longest completion times with Cantonese background music. Similarly, the same participants are expected to achieve the highest L2 reading comprehension scores and the shortest completion times with no music, relatively high scores and short times with Spanish background music, moderate scores and times with Cantonese background music, and the lowest scores and longest completion times with English background music.</p> <p>To sum up, the current study aims to explore:</p> <p>How do background music language and reading comprehension task language interact to influence Cantonese ESL learners' reading comprehension performance? Does such an interaction follow a graded pattern of disruption?</p> <hd id="AN0187503631-6">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0187503631-7">Participants</hd> <p>This study will recruit 96 participants aged 18–35 from The University of Hong Kong via mass email and posters. The analysis will be conducted on mean accuracy and total time using an <emph>F</emph> test for a two‐way repeated‐measures ANOVA, with text language (L1, L2) and lyrical language (no music, L1 lyrics, L2 lyrics, foreign lyrics) as within‐subject factors. We conducted an a priori power analysis with G*Power 3.1.9.6 (Faul et al. [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref49">7</reflink>]). Given the lack of prior studies reporting an effect size for the interaction between text language and background music lyrics language on reading comprehension, to be prudent, we adopted a small effect size of <emph>f</emph> = 0.10. According to the analysis, a sample size of 91 is required to yield 80% power in detecting the interaction between background music lyrics and text language, with ɑ being 0.05. Considering possible no‐shows, this study will recruit 96 participants in total. Participants must identify as ESL learners, with Cantonese as their native language, and should have normal vision and hearing, with no reading comprehension disorders. To minimize potential confounding effects related to familiarity with Spanish lyrics, participants are required to have no prior experience learning Spanish. Participants will also be excluded from the study if they have diagnosed dyslexia, hearing disorders, or uncorrected vision issues.</p> <hd id="AN0187503631-8">Procedure</hd> <p>The entire session will take approximately 90 min to complete. Participants will be invited by the research team to The University of Hong Kong to complete the experiment. Prior to data collection, they will sign a consent form and be assigned individually to a quiet room equipped with a computer, headset, and paper materials. We will present instructions and administer test materials using paper test booklets.</p> <p>Prior to the task administration, we will provide verbal instructions in each participant's preferred language, guiding them to complete the eight reading comprehension tasks at their usual, natural pace. During the reading comprehension tasks, participants will be exposed to eight conditions. They will read one article in Chinese and one article in English under a silent condition and three different background music conditions: English, Cantonese, and Spanish. At the beginning of each block, participants will receive a passage and be instructed to read it carefully in order to answer 14 related multiple‐choice questions. The time will start counting when the passage is delivered to the participant and will stop once they indicate finishing reading comprehension. Participants' completion times, as well as their responses for each passage, will be recorded using Qualtrics. To minimize fatigue, a one‐minute break will be provided between each block.</p> <p>Throughout the experiment, participants will perform reading comprehension tasks while listening to background music through headphones (see Table 1). In conditions A and B, participants will hear no music while completing reading comprehension tasks. In conditions C and D, participants will listen to Cantonese music from the Cantonese playlist while completing reading comprehension tasks. In conditions E and F, they will hear music from the English playlist, and in conditions G and H, Spanish music. Songs in the English and Spanish playlists have been carefully matched to those in the Cantonese playlist, maintaining identical melodies while differing only in lyrical language. Participants will be told that their focal task is to complete reading comprehension questions and suggested to ignore the music, as questions will be asked about each passage. Table 2 displays the task sequence for each participant based on the balanced Latin square design in order to balance practice effects and control order effects.</p> <p>1 TABLE Eight experimental conditions.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th align="left">Block</th><th align="center">Text language</th><th align="center">Lyrical language</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">A</td><td align="center">English</td><td align="center">No music</td></tr><tr><td align="left">B</td><td align="center">Chinese</td><td align="center">No music</td></tr><tr><td align="left">C</td><td align="center">English</td><td align="center">Cantonese</td></tr><tr><td align="left">D</td><td align="center">Chinese</td><td align="center">Cantonese</td></tr><tr><td align="left">E</td><td align="center">English</td><td align="center">English</td></tr><tr><td align="left">F</td><td align="center">Chinese</td><td align="center">English</td></tr><tr><td align="left">G</td><td align="center">English</td><td align="center">Spanish</td></tr><tr><td align="left">H</td><td align="center">Chinese</td><td align="center">Spanish</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>2 TABLE Balanced latin square for eight experimental conditions.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th align="left">Participant</th><th align="center">1st block</th><th align="center">2nd block</th><th align="center">3rd block</th><th align="center">4th block</th><th align="center">5th block</th><th align="center">6th block</th><th align="center">7th block</th><th align="center">8th block</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">1</td><td align="center">A</td><td align="center">B</td><td align="center">C</td><td align="center">D</td><td align="center">E</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">G</td><td align="center">H</td></tr><tr><td align="left">2</td><td align="center">B</td><td align="center">C</td><td align="center">D</td><td align="center">E</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">G</td><td align="center">H</td><td align="center">A</td></tr><tr><td align="left">3</td><td align="center">C</td><td align="center">D</td><td align="center">E</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">G</td><td align="center">H</td><td align="center">A</td><td align="center">B</td></tr><tr><td align="left">4</td><td align="center">D</td><td align="center">E</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">G</td><td align="center">H</td><td align="center">A</td><td align="center">B</td><td align="center">C</td></tr><tr><td align="left">5</td><td align="center">E</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">G</td><td align="center">H</td><td align="center">A</td><td align="center">B</td><td align="center">C</td><td align="center">D</td></tr><tr><td align="left">6</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">G</td><td align="center">H</td><td align="center">A</td><td align="center">B</td><td align="center">C</td><td align="center">D</td><td align="center">E</td></tr><tr><td align="left">7</td><td align="center">G</td><td align="center">H</td><td align="center">A</td><td align="center">B</td><td align="center">C</td><td align="center">D</td><td align="center">E</td><td align="center">F</td></tr><tr><td align="left">8</td><td align="center">H</td><td align="center">A</td><td align="center">B</td><td align="center">C</td><td align="center">D</td><td align="center">E</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">G</td></tr><tr><td align="left">...</td><td align="center">...</td><td align="center">...</td><td align="center">...</td><td align="center">...</td><td align="center">...</td><td align="center">...</td><td align="center">...</td><td align="center">...</td></tr><tr><td align="left">96</td><td align="center">H</td><td align="center">A</td><td align="center">B</td><td align="center">C</td><td align="center">D</td><td align="center">E</td><td align="center">F</td><td align="center">G</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Participants will be instructed to complete L1 and L2 reading comprehension test items carefully, with no time limit explicitly stated and no feedback provided on their responses. They will be encouraged to engage with the text at their own pace within this limit, focusing on comprehension without the pressure of being evaluated. Participants will be allowed to revisit the passage as needed. As compensation for their time and effort, participants will receive appropriate remuneration upon completing the experiment.</p> <hd id="AN0187503631-9">Measures</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0187503631-10">L1 and L2 Language Proficiency</hd> <p>Participants will be asked to self‐report their proficiency in both Cantonese and English as a reflection of their familiarity with the languages used in the current study's lyrics (Choi et al. [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref50">5</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref51">4</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref52">3</reflink>]; Zhang et al. [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref53">21</reflink>]). Specifically, they will rate the proficiency using a Likert scale ranging from 0 to 5, where 0 indicates no proficiency at all and 5 indicates a high level of proficiency for both languages.</p> <hd id="AN0187503631-11">Music</hd> <p>As a key element of the experimental design, background music will be played throughout the experimental session. Three dyadic playlists will be created, each consisting of 5 Disney‐themed lyrical songs. Playlist 1 will feature the English versions of all songs, with Playlist 2 featuring the Cantonese versions, and Playlist 3 featuring the Spanish versions. The order of songs is identical across playlists. At each corresponding position in the playlists, the songs will be the original soundtracks from the same films. This ensures consistency across conditions, with the language of the lyrics being the only variable.</p> <p>As an example, in the English lyrics condition, participants will listen to "Reflection" by Lea Salonga. In the Cantonese lyrics condition, they will hear "Reflection (Cantonese version)" by Kelly Chan. In the Spanish lyrics condition, participants will listen to "Reflejo" by María Caneda. All songs are original soundtracks from Disney's <emph>Mulan</emph> and share the same melody and musical arrangement across versions. Participants will hear the music through overhead earphones, with the loudness of each song normalized using Audacity version 3.7.0.0 at a 44.1 kHz sampling rate. Prior to the experiment, four Cantonese ESL speakers rated all 15 songs based on the emotional arousal they experienced (0 = <emph>extremely calm</emph>, 5 = <emph>moderately aroused</emph>, 10 = <emph>extremely aroused</emph>) when listening to each song. Table 3 presents the average score for each song's emotional arousal levels.</p> <p>3 TABLE Preliminary ratings on averaged emotional arousal level.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th align="left">Order of song</th><th align="center">Cantonese playlist, M (SD)</th><th align="center">English playlist</th><th align="center">Spanish playlist</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">1</td><td align="center">7.25 (1.89)</td><td align="center">8.25 (1.26)</td><td align="center">7.25 (0.96)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">2</td><td align="center">5.75 (2.06)</td><td align="center">5.75 (1.26)</td><td align="center">5.75 (2.22)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">3</td><td align="center">4.50 (2.08)</td><td align="center">5.50 (2.89)</td><td align="center">4.00 (1.41)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">4</td><td align="center">5.50 (1.00)</td><td align="center">4.75 (2.06)</td><td align="center">4.75 (1.89)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">5</td><td align="center">7.75 (0.96)</td><td align="center">7.00 (2.45)</td><td align="center">6.50 (0.58)</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0187503631-12">Reading Comprehension Performance</hd> <p>One article in Chinese and one in English will be selected from the Hong Kong Advanced Level Examination (HKALE) papers. Each passage contains 14 multiple‐choice questions designed to test readers' understanding of the text (See Data S1). The HKALE is a standardized pre‐university exam in Hong Kong administered from 1980 to 2013. We purposefully selected these passages because they are less likely to have been encountered by our participants, given that the exam has not been in use for over ten years and the material is now outdated. Chinese language and English language are two core subjects in the HKALE. Using official test materials from the HKALE ensures a high external validity for the current study. The mean sentence length was 21.16 (SD = 9.73) for the English passage and 22.03 (SD = 9.66) for the Chinese passage, respectively. An independent‐samples <emph>t</emph>‐test with text language as the independent variable showed no significant difference in sentence length, <emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib76" id="ref54">76</reflink>) = −0.40, <emph>p</emph> = 0.694, indicating that the two passages were matched on sentence length. Reading comprehension performance will be measured in two ways: reading comprehension accuracy, based on the participants' responses to the comprehension questions, and reading comprehension time, calculated as the total time taken to read the passage.</p> <hd id="AN0187503631-13">Data Analysis</hd> <p>Statistical analysis will be conducted using IBM SPSS 29.0. This study will examine how lyrics language interacts with reading task language to influence Cantonese ESL learners' L1 and L2 reading comprehension performance and whether this interaction follows a graded pattern of disruption. To verify participants' familiarity with the lyrics, a paired samples <emph>t</emph>‐test will be conducted to assess whether there is a significant difference between participants' self‐reported proficiency in English and Cantonese. Given that the sample consists of Cantonese ESL learners, we anticipate a significant difference in proficiency levels between Cantonese and English (<emph>p</emph> < 0.05), with participants demonstrating greater proficiency in Cantonese as compared to English.</p> <hd id="AN0187503631-14">Mean Accuracy Analysis</hd> <p>Data on participants' L1 and L2 reading comprehension mean accuracy will be analyzed using a 2 × 4 repeated measures ANOVA on participants' reading comprehension accuracy, with text language (L1, L2) and lyrical language condition (no music, L1 lyrics, L2 lyrics, foreign lyrics) as within‐subject factors.</p> <p>A significant main effect of lyrical language condition will suggest that background music lyrics language indeed impacts their reading comprehension accuracy, regardless of whether participants are reading in their L1 or L2. A significant main effect of text language will suggest an overall difference in reading comprehension accuracy between text in L1 and L2, independent of the lyrical language condition variance. In addition, a significant interaction effect, if detected, will indicate that the impact of background music lyrics on reading comprehension accuracy differs between one's L1 and L2 reading comprehension. If a significant main or interaction effect is found, we will then conduct post hoc comparisons with Bonferroni adjustment to identify specific pairs of conditions that significantly differ from each other.</p> <p>We expect a significant interaction with the following pattern: When text language is L1, the highest reading comprehension accuracy is observed in the no music condition, followed by the foreign lyrics condition. Reading comprehension accuracy is expected to be lower in the L2 lyrics condition as compared to the above two conditions, and lowest in the L1 lyrics condition. When the text language is L2, we as well expect the highest reading comprehension accuracy in the no music condition, followed by the foreign lyrics condition. Meanwhile, reading comprehension accuracy is expected to be lower in the L1 lyrics condition as compared to the above two conditions, and lowest in the L2 lyrics condition. To sum up, a graded effect of lyrical language condition on reading comprehension accuracy is expected, with the disruption increasing progressively as the language discrepancy between task and music lyrics decreases.</p> <hd id="AN0187503631-15">Reading Comprehension Time Analysis</hd> <p>Data on participants' reading comprehension total time will be analyzed using a 2 × 4 repeated measures ANOVA, with text language (L1, L2) and lyrical language condition (no music, L1 lyrics, L2 lyrics, foreign lyrics) as within‐subject factors.</p> <p>A significant main effect of lyrical language condition will indicate that background music lyrics indeed impact their reading comprehension time, regardless of whether participants are reading in their L1 or L2. A significant main effect of text language will suggest an overall difference in reading comprehension time between text in L1 and L2, independent of the lyrical language condition variance. In addition, a significant interaction effect, if detected, will indicate that the impact of background music lyrics on reading comprehension time differs between one's L1 and L2 reading comprehension. If a significant main or interaction effect is found, we will then conduct post hoc comparisons with Bonferroni adjustment to identify specific pairs of conditions that significantly differ from each other.</p> <p>We expect a significant interaction with the following pattern: When text language is L1, the shortest reading comprehension time should occur in the no music condition, followed by the foreign lyrics condition. Reading comprehension time is expected to increase in the L2 lyrics condition as compared to the above two conditions, and longest in the L1 lyrics condition. Similarly, when the text language is L2, we expect the shortest reading comprehension time in the no music condition, followed by the foreign lyrics condition. Meanwhile, reading comprehension time is expected to increase in the L1 lyrics condition as compared to the above two conditions, and be the longest in the L2 lyrics condition. That is, a graded effect of lyrical language condition on reading comprehension time is expected, with the time decreasing progressively as the language discrepancy between task and music lyrics decreases. To account for potential accuracy‐speed trade‐offs, we will examine whether higher reading accuracy in a given condition occurs alongside increased reading time. If a trade‐off is observed, we will report this relationship for a more comprehensive interpretation of the results.</p> <hd id="AN0187503631-16">Author Contributions</hd> <p> <bold>Yilun Ding:</bold> conceptualization, investigation, writing – original draft, methodology, validation, visualization, writing – review and editing, software, formal analysis, project administration, data curation, supervision, resources, funding acquisition. <bold>William Choi:</bold> funding acquisition, conceptualization, writing – review and editing, validation, methodology, software, formal analysis, data curation, supervision, resources.</p> <hd id="AN0187503631-17">Acknowledgments</hd> <p>This study will be supported, in part, by the Research Grants Council (General Research Fund [17600124]) awarded to the corresponding author.</p> <hd id="AN0187503631-18">Conflicts of Interest</hd> <p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest.</p> <hd id="AN0187503631-19">Data Availability Statement</hd> <p>The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.</p> <p>GRAPH: Data S1: Supporting Information.</p> <ref id="AN0187503631-20"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref3" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Funding: This work was supported by the Research Grants Council, University Grants Committee (17600124).</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0187503631-21"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibtext> Cassidy, G., and R. A. MacDonald. 2007. " The Effect of Background Music and Background Noise on the Task Performance of Introverts and Extraverts." Psychology of Music 35, no. 3 : 517 – 537. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735607076444.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref8" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Chew, A. S.‐Q., Y.‐T. Yu, S.‐W. Chua, and S. K.‐E. Gan. 2016. " The Effects of Familiarity and Language of Background Music on Working Memory and Language Tasks in Singapore." Psychology of Music 44, no. 6 : 1431 – 1438. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735616636209.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref52" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Choi, W., V. K. W. Lai, S.‐H. Kong, and A. Bautista. 2025. " Examining the Cognitive and Perceptual Perspectives of Music‐To‐Language Transfer: A Study of Cantonese–English Bilingual Children." Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 249 : 106069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2024.106069.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref51" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Choi, W., C. L. K. Ling, and C. H. J. Wu. 2024. " Musical Advantage in Lexical Tone Perception Hinges on Musical Instrument." Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal 41, no. 5 : 360 – 377. https://doi.org/10.1525/mp.2024.41.5.360.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref50" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Choi, W., C. Y. To, and R. Cheng. 2023. " The Choice of Musical Instrument Matters: Effect of Pitched But Not Unpitched Musicianship on Tone Identification and Word Learning." Applied Psycholinguistics 44, no. 5 : 844 – 857. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0142716423000358.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref20" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Dijkstra, T. O. N., A. Wahl, F. Buytenhuijs, et al. 2019. " Multilink: A Computational Model for Bilingual Word Recognition and Word Translation." Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 22, no. 4 : 657 – 679. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728918000287.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref49" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Faul, F., E. Erdfelder, A.‐G. Lang, and A. Buchner. 2007. " G*Power 3: A Flexible Statistical Power Analysis Program for the Social, Behavioral, and Biomedical Sciences." Behavior Research Methods 39, no. 2 : 175 – 191.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref25" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Francis, W. S., and M. Gutiérrez. 2012. " Bilingual Recognition Memory: Stronger Performance but Weaker Levels‐Of‐Processing Effects in the Less Fluent Language." Memory & Cognition 40 : 496 – 503. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421‐011‐0163‐3.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref4" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Hao, H., and A. R. A. Conway. 2022. " The Impact of Auditory Distraction on Reading Comprehension: An Individual Differences Investigation." Memory & Cognition 50, no. 4 : 852 – 863. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421‐021‐01242‐6.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hughes, R. W. 2014. " Auditory Distraction: A Duplex‐Mechanism Account." PsyCh Journal 3, no. 1 : 30 – 41. https://doi.org/10.1002/pchj.44.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kotsopoulou, A., and S. Hallam. 2010. " The Perceived Impact of Playing Music While Studying: Age and Cultural Differences." Educational Studies 36, no. 4 : 431 – 440. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055690903424774.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lecompte, D. C. 1995. " An Irrelevant Speech Effect With Repeated and Continuous Background Speech." Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2, no. 3 : 391 – 397. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210978.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marsh, J. E., R. W. Hughes, and D. M. Jones. 2008. " Auditory Distraction in Semantic Memory: A Process‐Based Approach." Journal of Memory and Language 58, no. 3 : 682 – 700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.05.002.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Martin, R. C., M. S. Wogalter, and J. G. Forlano. 1988. " Reading Comprehension in the Presence of Unattended Speech and Music." Journal of Memory and Language 27, no. 4 : 382 – 398. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749‐596x(88)90063‐0.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Quan, Y., and Y. L. Kuo. 2022. " The Effects of Chinese and English Background Music on Chinese Reading Comprehension." Psychology of Music 51, no. 2 : 655 – 663. https://doi.org/10.1177/03057356221101647.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sandoval, T. C., T. H. Gollan, V. S. Ferreira, and D. P. Salmon. 2010. " What Causes the Bilingual Disadvantage in Verbal Fluency? The Dual‐Task Analogy." Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 13, no. 2 : 231 – 252. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728909990514.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sörqvist, P., N. Halin, and S. Hygge. 2010. " Individual Differences in Susceptibility to the Effects of Speech on Reading Comprehension." Applied Cognitive Psychology 24, no. 1 : 67 – 76. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1543.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sun, Y., C. Sun, C. Li, X. Shao, Q. Liu, and H. Liu. 2024. " Impact of Background Music on Reading Comprehension: Influence of Lyrics Language and Study Habits." Frontiers in Psychology 15 : 1363562. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1363562.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vasilev, M. R., L. Hitching, and S. Tyrrell. 2023. " What Makes Background Music Distracting? Investigating the Role of Song Lyrics Using Self‐Paced Reading." Journal of Cognitive Psychology 36, no. 1 : 138 – 164. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2023.2209346.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vasilev, M. R., J. A. Kirkby, and B. Angele. 2018. " Auditory Distraction During Reading: A Bayesian Meta‐Analysis of a Continuing Controversy." Perspectives on Psychological Science 13, no. 5 : 567 – 597. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617747398.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zhang, L., J. Zhu, J. Shao, and C. Zhang. 2024. " The Combined Effects of Bilingualism and Musicianship on Listeners' Perception of Non‐Native Lexical Tones." Speech Communication 165 : 103147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2024.10314.7.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Yilun Ding and William Choi</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib76" firstref="ref54"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1481517
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Distraction across Languages: The Impact of Background Music Lyrics on First- and Second Language Reading
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Yilun+Ding%22">Yilun Ding</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0009-0009-0492-989X">0009-0009-0492-989X</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22William+Choi%22">William Choi</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7981-7782">0000-0001-7981-7782</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Applied+Cognitive+Psychology%22"><i>Applied Cognitive Psychology</i></searchLink>. 2025 39(4).
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 7
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Sino+Tibetan+Languages%22">Sino Tibetan Languages</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22English+%28Second+Language%29%22">English (Second Language)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Native+Language%22">Native Language</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reading+Processes%22">Reading Processes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Attention+Control%22">Attention Control</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Music%22">Music</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Poetry%22">Poetry</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reading+Comprehension%22">Reading Comprehension</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Study+Habits%22">Study Habits</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Semantics%22">Semantics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interference+%28Learning%29%22">Interference (Learning)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Silent+Reading%22">Silent Reading</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Accuracy%22">Accuracy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Auditory+Discrimination%22">Auditory Discrimination</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22China%22">China</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1002/acp.70104
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0888-4080<br />1099-0720
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Background music with lyrics can be a prevalent distraction in environments where people study or read while music plays. However, such effects on reading comprehension across different language contexts remain insufficiently investigated. Guided by the duplex-mechanism account of auditory distraction and the semantic-interference hypothesis, the current study explores the graded interaction of background music lyrics and task language on reading comprehension performance among Cantonese ESL learners. Ninety-five Cantonese ESL learners will be tested on L1 and L2 reading comprehension tasks under a silent condition and three background music conditions: L1, L2, and foreign. We will measure reading comprehension accuracy and the time taken to read each passage. By systematically examining cross-language auditory distraction in reading comprehension, the current study could potentially refine theoretical accounts of auditory distraction and optimize learning environments for L2 learners.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1481517
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1481517
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1002/acp.70104
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 7
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Sino Tibetan Languages
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: English (Second Language)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Native Language
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Reading Processes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Attention Control
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Music
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Poetry
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Reading Comprehension
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Study Habits
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Semantics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interference (Learning)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Silent Reading
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Accuracy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Auditory Discrimination
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: China
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Distraction across Languages: The Impact of Background Music Lyrics on First- and Second Language Reading
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Yilun Ding
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: William Choi
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 07
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0888-4080
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1099-0720
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 39
            – Type: issue
              Value: 4
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Applied Cognitive Psychology
              Type: main
ResultId 1