Attention is a concept commonly studied by scholars in the field of cognitive psychology as they primarily interest in how humans process information within a particular environment(Goldstein, 2014). This relates to our attentional system because this is our ability to be able to focus in on something despite the stimuli that may be around us(Beard, Sawyer, & Hofmann, 2012; Cohen, 2014). Attention is an aspect of humans that is present from birth, and it is considered to a reflex that provides us the ability to know what should or shouldn't be of importance (in terms of alterntess) and thus is part of the survival process(Goldstein, 2014). Attention functions as such: when you have four sources of sound in one room (TV, radio, music, chatter) you can turn down or attenuate 3 to attend to the fourth(Beard et al., 2012; Goldstein, 2014). Both habitation and sensory adaptations are processes by which our mental attention is focused on stimuli that change rather than external factors that remain constant. Information that remains unchanged is ignored by our sensory receptors (Ciccarelli & White, 2015(Beard et al., 2012; Cohen, 2014)). In other words, we become desensitized or unresponsive to constant stimuli because our adaptive mind normalizes the stimuli resulting in a decrease in demand for our attention.
Researchers further explained that when a stimuli is below one’s absolute threshold, which is the lowest amount of stimulation a person can consciously identify, an individual’s sensory receptors are activated but are too weak to reach conscious awareness (Beard et al., 2012; Ciccarelli & White, 2015). Thus, stimuli below one’s absolute threshold are robust enough to result in automatic responses (physical tension) but too weak to be the cause of any behavioral changes (Ciccarelli & White, 2015). Furthermore, such methods may also be limited in efficacy due to habitation, sensory adaption and perceptual set/expectancy. Both habitation and neural adaptions are processes by which our mental attention is focused on stimuli that change rather than external factors that remain constant (Ciccarelli & White, 2015(Beard et al., 2012)). Information that remains unchanged is ignored by our sensory receptors (Ciccarelli & White, 2015). In other words, we become desensitized or unresponsive to constant stimuli because our adaptive mind normalizes the stimuli resulting in a decrease in demand for our attention(Beard et al., 2012).
Kahneman’s model contributed to early foundations of attention research and informed future experiments about brain activity relating to the process of stimuli(Cohen, 2014; Goldstein, 2014; Seeber, 2011). This work led to the emergence of information processing models of attention. Donald Broadbent has made contributions to this field when studying competing messages received by traffic controllers on military aircraft base(Cohen, 2014; Goldstein, 2014). He designed an experience to examine the process of shifting attention; it is assumed that we have restricted capacity to process information to prevent over-stimulation, this is controlled by a filter that controls how much information one can process(Cohen, 2014; Goldstein, 2014). Broadbent referred to this as "Dichotic listening" which again is a filter model of attention that posits humans can pay attention to only a certain extent from one ear at a time(Goldstein, 2014; Seeber, 2011). Broadbent assumed that the filter rejected the non-shadowed or unattended message at an early stage of processing(Cohen, 2014; Goldstein, 2014).
Treisman's model differs from Broadbent in that he suggests that the information is not eliminated but rather attenuated(Treisman, 2014), diminished attention but not completely gone(Cohen, 2014; Goldstein, 2014). Therefore, for example, if a channel includes your name while there is a competing message you still have the ability to hear it because the material is accessible. Treisman held conducted an experiment among bilingual individuals(Treisman, 2014), and presented them with an English, attended message as well as an unattended message in their native language of French(Cohen, 2014; Goldstein, 2014).The study concludes the ability for the participants to relay the fact that both messages were identical in meaning. Broadbent's filter model is thus challenged(Treisman, 2014), as it suggests that the biologically given filter can not explain our ability to filter information(Cowan, Rouder, Blume, & Saults, 2012; Goldstein, 2014). It is not that there isn’t a biological component to attention, but that it can not fully explain how we filter information(Marwala, 2014). Treisman’s studies highlighted the importance of semantic processing, or the meaning of the information as it relates to processing(Goldstein, 2014; Treisman, 2014).Bottleneck theories encompass both explanations for attention system(Cohen, 2014; Goldstein, 2014; Marwala, 2014; Seeber, 2011).Broadbent emphasis on physical characteristics of sound and Treisman's stresses the importance semantic processing(Treisman, 2014), the meaning of the information we are being exposed to.
According to Centers for Disease Control 2015 data of psychiatric diagnoses of ADHD, nearly 20% of school-aged children have ADHD(Lahey et al., 2015). Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a cognitive and behavioral, developmental disorder that includes inability to be attentive, hyperactivity and impulsiveness(Lahey et al., 2015; Owens & Hinshaw, 2016). As of recently, there have been several attempts to use these models as well as neurological imaging to explain central features of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) (Cowan et al., 2012; Goldstein, 2014; Lahey et al., 2015). Such symptoms have been attributed to abnormal dopamine functioning, and result in a learning deficiency(Wu, Xiao, Sun, Zou, & Zhu, 2012). Attention disorders as it pertains to the executive functioning and prioritizing are also impacted by dopamine modulations(Owens & Hinshaw, 2016; Wu et al., 2012).. Medication can sometimes remedy the dopamine dysfunctions and decrease negative emotional, learning, and behavioral outcomes(Owens & Hinshaw, 2016; Wu et al., 2012).
Researchers have observed that ADHD children appear to have a cognitive bottleneck when it comes to multitasking(Cowan et al., 2012; Jacobson et al., 2011).Cognitive bottlenecking is also regarded as the reason for low reading fluency among children with ADHD(Jacobson et al., 2011). The overload of information trying to be pushed through like a bottleneck(Marwala, 2014) results in attention deficiency and slows the process of information needed for executive control(Jacobson et al., 2011; Lahey et al., 2015). Abnormalities in working memory have been cited to be a critical component to ADHD (Cowan et al., 2012)and the inability to reorient attention or accuracy perceived the stimulus(Jacobson et al., 2011).. Considering all the models presented here, it appears that the best approach to address ADHD would be to address the biochemical aspects(Wu et al., 2012) along with behavioral(Lahey et al., 2015). strategies to effective reduce adverse outcomes for this growing population.
References
Beard, C., Sawyer, A. T., & Hofmann, S. G. (2012). Efficacy of attention bias modification using threat and appetitive stimuli: A meta-analytic review. Behavior therapy, 43(4), 724-740.
Ciccarelli, S. K., & White, J. N. (2015). Psychology: Pearson Education.
Cohen, R. A. (2014). Cognitive Psychology of Attention: Foundations The Neuropsychology of Attention (pp. 19-53): Springer.
Cowan, N., Rouder, J. N., Blume, C. L., & Saults, J. S. (2012). Models of verbal working memory capacity: what does it take to make them work? Psychological Review, 119(3), 480.
Goldstein, E. B. (2014). Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research and Everyday Experience: Cengage Learning.
Jacobson, L. A., Ryan, M., Martin, R. B., Ewen, J., Mostofsky, S. H., Denckla, M. B., & Mahone, E. M. (2011). Working memory influences processing speed and reading fluency in ADHD. Child Neuropsychol, 17(3), 209-224. doi:10.1080/09297049.2010.532204
Lahey, B. B., Pelham, W. E., Loney, J., Kipp, H., Ehrhardt, A., Lee, S. S., . . . Massetti, G. (2015). Three-year predictive validity of DSM-IV attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children diagnosed at 4–6 years of age. American Journal of Psychiatry.
Marwala, T. (2014). Filtering Irrelevant Information for Rational Decision Making Artificial Intelligence Techniques for Rational Decision Making (pp. 111-130): Springer.
Owens, E. B., & Hinshaw, S. P. (2016). Childhood conduct problems and young adult outcomes among women with childhood attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 125(2), 220.
Seeber, K. G. (2011). Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: Existing theories—new models. Interpreting, 13(2), 176-204.
Treisman, A. (2014). The psychological reality of levels of processing. Levels of processing in human memory, 301-330.
Wu, J., Xiao, H., Sun, H., Zou, L., & Zhu, L.-Q. (2012). Role of dopamine receptors in ADHD: a systematic meta-analysis. Molecular neurobiology, 45(3), 605-620.
