Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

This entry addresses models of processing resources developed by researchers who study attention, largely to account for limits of performance. A prominent performance limit is the common difficulty of attending concurrently to more than one object or of conducting more than one cognitive process at the same time, typically encountered in multiple-task situations (namely, in which a person is to perform more than one task at a time).

Whereas attention is clearly associated with selection, namely, the operation that enables the execution of one particular controlled process (rather than others) on one particular object (rather than on others), there is no agreement on what requires selection or on what limits it.

One stance, asserted in what Diego Fernandez-Duque and Mark Johnson call “cause theories,” holds that attention is enabled by some internal input required for processing (e.g., locations in working memory, share of dedicated time in the executive control system, communication channels). The allocation of that input determines both what is selected and the quality of behavioral output of whatever is selected. The prevalent postulate of such theories is that performance, or the information processing that must generate it, is enabled by the availability of that scarce internal input, and hence performance deficits are due to the fact that it is not supplied in sufficient quantity, or sufficiently early, to the object pertinent for that performance. The volume of that internal input is often called processing resources or cognitive resources.

Evolution of Models

The notion of resources explicates a premise implicit in naive thinking and reflected in natural language: Attention is said to be “paid,” namely, directed and/or expended. Whatever is expended must be taken to be some sort of structure or commodity that is limited in some way, hence internal input. Early theorists of attention, such as Alan Welford and Donald Broadbent, construed input, respectively, as a uni-partite channel that may only be directed as a whole to a task or an object of attention, or as a single channel with limited capacity that is typically capable of handling only a single task.

Daniel Kahneman posited that internal input may be expended in various amounts and may be divided between objects of attention. He argued that the existence of such input is suggested by what he called the intensive aspects of attention, namely, the dependence of performance on vigilance or arousal, which he ascribed to the degree of accessibility or activation of that internal input.

Donald Norman and Daniel Bobrow coined the term resources as a label for the hypothetical internal input assumed to be demanded for a broad range of functions believed to require attention. They suggested that performance of a task or process is resource limited, namely, that it depends on the amount of resources invested in it, up to a point at which performance becomes data limited, namely, insensitive to resources and determined just by data quality. For example, a task of detecting a moderately loud tone may demand a small quantity of resources; when that quantity is not fully available, detection may sometimes fail; when it is available, failures must be due to poor sensory data. However, the shape of this performance-resource function is strongly task specific. The way Norman and Bobrow proposed to study that function is via analyzing dual-task performance by means of a curve they termed performance operating characteristics (POCs), plotting performance of one task as a function of performance of the concurrent task.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading