Theories of Attention

Dr. Shivani Pandey

 Theories of Attention
• Bottelneck theories or Filter Theories
• Capacity Theory
• Feature Integration theory
• Signal-detection theory (SDT)
• Schema theory
 Filter Theory
• To explain these findings, Broadbent (1958)
proposed a filter theory of attention, which states
that there are limits on how much information a
person can attended to at any given time.

• Therefore, if the amount of information available

at any given time exceeds capacity, the person
uses an attentional filter to let some information
through and block the rest
 Attenuation Theory
• Psychologist Anne Treisman (1960) proposed a
modified filter theory, one she called attenuation
theory. Instead of considering unattended
messages completely blocked before they could
be processed for meaning (as in filter theory),

• Treisman argued that their “volume” was “turned

down.” In other words, some meaningful
information in unattended messages might still
be available, even if hard to recover.
• Incoming messages are subjected to three
kinds of analysis.

• In the first, the message’s physical properties,

such as pitch or loudness, are analyzed.
• The second analysis is linguistic, a process of
parsing the message into syllables and words.
• The third kind of analysis is semantic,
processing the meaning of the message.
• Note the contrasts here between attenuation
theory and filter theory:

• Attenuation theory allows for many different

kinds of analyses of all messages, whereas filter
theory allows for only one.

• Filter theory holds that unattended messages,

once processed for physical characteristics, are
discarded and fully blocked; attenuation theory
holds that unattended messages are weakened
but the information they contain is still available.
 Late-Selection Theory
• Deutsch and Deutsch (1963) proposed a theory,
called the late-selection theory, that goes even
further. Later elaborated and extended by
Norman (1968)

• this theory holds that all messages are routinely

processed for at least some aspects of meaning—
that selection of which message to respond to
thus happens “late” in processing
• Note that filter theory hypothesizes a
bottleneck—a point at which the processes a
person can bring to bear on information are
greatly limited—at the filter.

• Late-selection theory also describes a bottleneck

but locates it later in the processing, after certain
aspects of the meaning have been extracted. All
material is processed up to this point, and
information judged to be most “important” is
elaborated more fully. This elaborated material is
more likely to be retained; unelaborated material
is forgotten.
 Capacity theories
Capacity models of attention

• These models help to explain how we can perform

more than one attention-demanding task at a time.

• There are two different kinds:

• One kind of model suggests that there is one single
pool of attentional resources that can be divided freely.
• other model suggests that there are multiple sources
of attention (McDowd, 2007).
Allocation of Attentional Resources
 Daniel Kahneman (1973) model of
attention
• Attention as a set of cognitive processes for
categorizing and recognizing stimuli.

• In Kahneman’s (1973) view, attention is part of

what the layperson would call “mental effort.”
The more effort expended, the more attention
we are using.
• Kahneman’s (1973) model of attention. Essentially, this
model depicts the allocation of mental resources to
various cognitive tasks.

• An analogy could be made to an investor depositing

money in one or more of several different bank
accounts—here, the individual “deposits” mental
capacity to one or more of several different tasks.

• Many factors influence this allocation of capacity,

which itself depends on the extent and type of mental
resources available. The availability of mental
resources, in turn, is affected by the overall level of
arousal, or state of alertness.
 Feature-Integration Theory
• Anne Treisman has developed an elaborate
theory of attention and perceptual processing
in 1980 known as Feature-Integration Theory
 Feature-Integration Theory
• The basic elements:

• Distributed attention
• Focused attention.
 Feature-Integration Theory
• We sometimes look at a scene using distributed
attention, that is all parts of the scene processed at the
same time.

• On other occasions, we use focused attention, with

each item in the scene processed one at a time

• Distributed attention and focused attention form a

continuum, so that you frequently use a kind of
attention that is somewhere between those two
extremes.
 Feature-Integration Theory
• Distributed attention –(all parts of the scene processed at
the same time.)

• Allows you to register features automatically.

• Use parallel processing across the field, registering all the

features simultaneously.

• Distributed attention is a relatively low-level kind of

processing. In fact, this kind of processing is so effortless
that you are not even aware that you’re using it.
 Feature-Integration Theory
• Focused attention (each item in the scene processed one
at a time).

• Requires serial processing, and you identify one object at a

time.

• This more demanding kind of processing is necessary when

the objects are more complex.

• Focused attention identifies which features belong

together—for example, which shape goes with which color.
 Feature-Integration Theory
Current status of the theory
• Researches demonstrated that in place of two clear-cut
categories, we find —in some conditions—distributed
attention to occasionally resemble focused attention
(Bundesen & Habekost, 2005).

• Researchers are currently examining how some of the

components of featureintegration theory can be
explained at the cellular level (Bundesen et al., 2005).

• However, feature-integration theory still provides an

important framework for understanding visual
attention (Müller & Krummenacher, 2006)
 Signal-detection theory (SDT)
• Is a framework to explain how people pick out
the few important stimuli when they are
embedded in a wealth of irrelevant,
distracting stimuli. SDT often is used to
measure sensitivity to a target’s presence.
• When we try to detect a target stimulus
(signal), there are four possible outcomes
 Signal-detection theory (SDT)
Signal-detection theory can be discussed in the context of
attention, perception, or memory:

• Attention—paying enough attention to perceive objects

that are there.

• Perception—perceiving faint signals that may or may

not be beyond your perceptual range (such as a very
high-pitched tone).

• Memory—indicating whether you have/have not been

exposed to a stimulus before, such as whether the
word “champagne” appeared on a list that was to be
memorized.
 Signal-detection theory (SDT)
• Vigilance: Waiting to Detect a Signal:- When you have to
pay attention in order to detect a stimulus that can occur at
any time over a long period of time, you need to be vigilant.

• What is Vigilance? Vigilance refers to a person’s ability to

attend to a field of stimulation over a prolonged period,
during which the person seeks to detect the appearance of
a particular target stimulus of interest. When being vigilant,
the individual watchfully waits to detect a signal stimulus
that may appear at an unknown time.

• Typically, vigilance is needed in settings where a given

stimulus occurs only rarely
 Signal-detection theory (SDT)
• In an early study, participants watched a visual display that looked
like the face of a clock (Mackworth, 1948). A clock hand moved in
continuous steps except that sometimes it would take a double
step, which needed to be detected by the participants. Participants’
performance began to deteriorate substantially after just half an
hour of observation (see MacLean et al., 2009, for a more recent
study). To relate these findings to SDT, over time it appears that
participants become less willing to risk reporting false alarms. They
err instead by failing to report the presence of the signal stimulus
when they are not sure they detect it, showing higher rates of
misses.

• Training can help to increase vigilance, but to counteract fatigue,

nothing but taking a break really helps much (Fisk & Schneider,
1981).
 Signal-detection theory (SDT)
• Neuroscience and Vigilance Increased vigilance is
seen in cases where emotional stimuli are used
(e.g., when somebody is confronted with a
threatening stimulus).

• The amygdala plays a pivotal role in the

recognition of emotional stimuli. Thus, the
amygdala appears to be an important brain
structure in the regulation of vigilance (Phelps,
2004, 2006; van Marle et al., 2009).
 Schema Theory
• Ulric Neisser (1976) offered a completely
different conceptualization of attention, called
schema theory.

• He argued that we don’t filter, attenuate, or

forget unwanted material. Instead, we never
acquire it in the first place.

• unattended information is simply left out of our

cognitive processing.
• Inattentional blindness, the phenomenon of
not perceiving a stimulus that might be
literally right in front of you, unless you are
paying attention to it (Mack, 2003; Simons &
Ambinder, 2005).