When analyzing attention as a resource, researchers must distinguish between the identity claim (attention literally is a resource) and the causality claim (attention causally depends on a resource for its operations).
William James described attention as a form of selection specifically for guiding behavior, where a person mentally selects a target to respond to it, such as reaching for it or committing it to memory.
Wu, W. (2014) authored the book 'Attention', published by Routledge.
William James described attention in 1890 as follows: "Everyone knows what attention is. It is the taking possession by the mind, in clear and vivid form, of one out of what seem several simultaneously possible objects or trains of thought. Focalization, concentration, of consciousness are of its essence. It implies withdrawal from some things in order to deal effectively with others, and is a condition which has a real opposite in the confused, dazed, scatterbrained state which in French is called distraction, and Zerstreutheit in German."
Kentridge (2011) explores the possibility that attention can function unconsciously.
Emotion influences attention but does not fit into the categories of top-down, bottom-up, or value-based attention.
Attention can be categorized as voluntary, where the mind takes possession of a voice to process it, or involuntary, where the mind is compelled to process a voice that captures attention.
Attention is divided into perception-based forms (external attention) and memory-based forms (internal attention), as noted by Chun et al. (2011).
When subjects attend, their minds select, or are selected by, a specific target, which leads them to respond to that target.
Cherry (1953) utilized a dichotic listening paradigm to study attention, where subjects were presented with two verbal streams via headphones and tasked with verbally repeating only one of the two streams.
Attention has been investigated across various species, including nonhuman primates (Cohen & Maunsell, 2011), rodents, birds, and bees (Eckstein et al., 2013; Sridharan et al., 2014; Wang & Krauzlis, 2018).
Cognitive scientists can construct an explanation of attention by using the functional structure of attention as a computational theory, dissecting performance in a concrete experimental paradigm, modeling the resulting data with algorithms, and measuring neural activity to identify the brain regions that implement those algorithms.
Scientific studies of attention possess functional unity because each investigates attention as a subject mentally selecting targets to respond to within a task.
Daniel Kahneman proposed that attention might be equivalent to effort, where varying levels of effort correspond to varying levels of attention.
The theoretical concept of attention has four dimensions: the target of attention (what subjects attend to), the mode of attention (how subjects attend), the purpose of attention (associated with various responses), and the subject (the one who attends).
Disorders such as attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder, autism, obsessive compulsive disorder, schizophrenia, and various substance addictions are associated with changes in attention.
Donald Broadbent (1958) and Nilli Lavie (2005) are scientists who have posited limited resources, such as channel capacity or cognitive load, to explain limitations in performance, endorsing the view that attention causally depends on these resources rather than being identical to them.
Historical effects on attention operate diachronically, meaning they are rooted in past events, whereas intentions or flashes of light affect attention synchronically at the time of the event.
Attention is necessary because the world contains too much information, and coherent action requires selection to manage potential information overload, as noted by Broadbent (1958) and Carrasco (2011).
Attention can be firmly controlled, such as when focusing on work to meet a deadline, or involuntarily lured away, such as when social media habits lead to doom scrolling.
The scientific concept of attention is defined by the formula 'subject S m-attends to T to respond R,' where S is the subject, m is the mode, T is the target, and R is the response guided by attention.
One theoretical perspective treats attention as a gate for consciousness, asserting that individuals are conscious only of what they attend to, and that removing attention removes awareness (Mack & Rock, 1998).
The 'attention economy' concept assumes that attention is a resource or commodity that social media companies design applications to capture.
Biased competition, proposed by Desimone and Duncan (1995), is an influential theory of attention where internal causal factors, known as biases, explain attentional selection during action.
Cognitive science implicitly operates with a common conception of attention because visual search, spatial cueing, and retro-cueing paradigms exemplify the same functional structure.
Moray (1959) demonstrated the 'cocktail party effect,' showing that while subjects deliberately shadow one auditory stream, their attention can be captured if their own name is uttered in the unattended stream.
Saliency maps function as a bottom-up bias, while intentions function as a top-down bias, and both serve as internal mechanisms to resolve behavioral competition and set attention.
The Open Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science categorizes attention into complex modalities, including conscious, top-down, visual, and visual working memory-based attention.
Fear strongly directs attention to the stimuli that trigger the fear response.
Attention guides behavior in both daily life and laboratory settings and is considered one of the most well-studied and well-understood psychological phenomena, though it remains a source of controversy.
In experimental paradigms used to study attention, the empirical sufficient condition is that if a subject mentally selects a target to perform an experimental task, then the subject attends to that target (Wu, 2024).
An alternative perspective to the 'gate' theory suggests that individuals can be conscious of more than what they attend to, with attention merely modifying consciousness (Carrasco et al., 2004; Tse, 2005).
The spotlight metaphor in cognitive science refers to an internal mechanism that alters representations or processing, rather than a literal spotlight shooting from the eyes.
Daniel Kahneman (1973) proposed the claim that attention is energy, suggesting that attention levels fluctuate in correlation with energy levels.
Karl Groos noted in 1896 that there is no generally recognized answer to the question 'What is Attention?' and that different attempts at a solution diverge in a disturbing manner.