Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-s22k5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-07T14:15:55.514Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - Human attention and its implications for human–computer interaction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 February 2011

By
Claudia Roda
Edited by
Claudia Roda
Claudia Roda
Affiliation:
The American University of Paris, France
Get access

Summary

Remembering planned activities, resuming tasks previously interrupted, recalling the names of colleagues, sustaining focused performance under the pressure of interruptions, ensuring that we don't miss important information…these are only a few examples of critical activities whose performance is guided by attentional processes. This chapter proposes that knowledge about attentional processes can help us design systems that support users in situations such as those described above. The first part of the chapter gives an overview of some of the essential theoretical findings about human attention. The second part analyses attentional breakdowns and how those theoretical findings may be applied in order to design systems that either help avoid attentional breakdowns or assist in recovering from them.

Introduction

Current information and communication technologies concentrate on providing services to users performing focused activities. However, focused activity is no longer the norm. Users are often interrupted, they switch between the contexts of different devices and tasks, maintain awareness about the activity of distant collaborators and manage very large quantities of information. All this results in high cognitive load that may hinder users' overall achievements.

In order to address interaction in a more realistic manner, we have been working on the development of systems that are capable of supporting the processes that govern human cognitive resources allocation: attentional processes.

Type
Chapter
Information
Human Attention in Digital Environments , pp. 11 - 62
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allport, A. 1993. Attention and control: Have we been asking the wrong questions? A critical review of twenty-five years, in D. E. Meyer and S. Kornblum (eds.), Attention and Performance. London: MIT Press: vol. XIV: 183–218.Google Scholar
Altmann, E. M., and Gray, W. D. 2000. Managing attention by preparing to forget. Paper presented at the IEA 2000/HFES 2000 Congress. San Diego: 152–5
Altmann, E. M., and Trafton, J. G. 2002. Memory for goals: An activation-based model, Cognitive Science 26(1): 39–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altosaar, M., Vertegaal, R., Sohn, C., and Cheng, D. 2006. AuraOrb: Social notification appliance. Paper presented at the CHI '06, Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: 381–6Google Scholar
Anderson, J. R. 1983. A spreading activation theory of memory, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 22(3): 261–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J. R. 1996. ACT: A simple theory of complex cognition, American Psychologist 51(4): 355–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arroyo Acosta, E. 2007. Mediating disruption in human–computer interaction from implicit metrics of attention. Doctoral thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
Awh, E., Vogel, E. K., and Oh, S. H. 2006. Interactions between attention and working memory, Neuroscience 139(1): 201–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baddeley, A. 1986. Working Memory. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baddeley, A. 2003. Working memory: Looking back and looking forward, Nature Reviews Neuroscience 4: 29–39CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baddeley, A., and Hitch, G. J. 1974. Working memory, in Bower, G. A. (ed.), Recent Advances in Learning and Motivation. New York: Academic Press: vol. VIII: 47–89Google Scholar
Baddeley, A., and Weiskrantz, L. (eds.) 1993. Attention: Selection, awareness and control. A tribute to Donald Broadbent. Oxford: Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
Bailey, B. P., Adamczyk, P. D., Chang, T. Y., and Chilson, N. A. 2006. A framework for specifying and monitoring user tasks, Computers in Human Behavior 22(4): 709–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, B. P., and Konstan, J. A. 2006. On the need for attention-aware systems: Measuring effects of interruption on task performance, error rate, and affective state, Computers in Human Behavior 22(4): 685–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, B. P., Konstan, J. A., and Carlis, J. V. 2001. The effects of interruptions on task performance, annoyance, and anxiety in the user interface. Paper presented at the INTERACT '01: 593–601
Bargh, J. A., and Chartrand, T. L. 1999. The unbearable automaticity of being, American Psychologist 54(7): 462–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bargh, J. A., and Chartrand, T. L. 2000. The mind in the middle: A practical guide to priming and automaticity research, in Reis, H. T. and Judd, C. M. (eds.), Handbook of Research Methods in Social and Personality Psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press: vol. XII: 253–85Google Scholar
Bartram, L., Ware, C., and Calvert, T. 2003. Moticons: Detection, distraction and task, International Journal of Human–Computer Studies 58(5): 515–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bichot, N. P., Cave, K. R., and Pashler, H. 1999. Visual selection mediated by location: Feature-based selection of noncontiguous locations, Perception and Psychophysics 61(3): 403–23CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bohnenberger, T., Brandherm, B., Grossmann-Hutter, B., Heckmann, D., and Wittig, F. 2002. Empirically grounded decision-theoretic adaptation to situation-dependent resource limitations, Künstliche Intelligenz 3: 10–16Google Scholar
Bosse, T., Maanen, P.-P., and Treur, J. 2006. A cognitive model for visual attention and its application. Paper presented at the International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology. IAT '06. IEEE/WIC/ACM 255–62
Boudreau, C. E., Williford, T. H., and Maunsell, J. H. R. 2006. Effects of task difficulty and target likelihood in area V4 of macaque monkeys, Journal of Neurophysiology 96: 2377–87CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broadbent, D. E. 1958. Perception and Communication. London: Pergamon PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brush, B., Bargeron, D., Gupta, A., and Grudin, J. 2001. Notification for Shared Annotation of Digital Documents (Technical Report No. MSR-TR-2001–87): Microsoft Research
Buehner, M., Krumm, S., Ziegler, M., and Pluecken, T. 2006. Cognitive abilities and their interplay: Reasoning, crystallized intelligence, working memory components, and sustained attention, Journal of Individual Differences 27(2): 57–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgess, P. W., and Shallice, T. 1997. The relationship between prospective and retrospective memory: Neuropsychological evidence, in Conway, M. A. (ed.), Cognitive Models of Memory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press: 247–72Google Scholar
Card, S. K., and Nation, D. 2002. Degree-of-interest trees: A component of an attention–reactive user interface. Paper presented at the Advanced Visual Interfaces Conference: 231–45
Carroll, J. M., Neale, D. C., Isenhour, P. L., Rosson, M. B., and McCrickard, D. S. 2003. Notification and awareness: Synchronizing task-oriented collaborative activity, International Journal of Human–Computer Studies 58(5): 605–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cave, K. R., and Bichot, N. P. 1999. Visuospatial attention: Beyond a spotlight model, Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 6(2): 204–23CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, D., and Vertegaal, R. 2004. Using mental load for managing interruptions in physiologically attentive user interfaces, in Extended Abstracts of the 2004 Conference on Human Factors and Computing Systems. Vienna, Austria: ACM Press: 1513–16Google Scholar
Chewar, C. M., McCrickard, D. S., and Sutcliffe, A. G. 2004. Unpacking critical parameters for interface design: Evaluating notification systems with the IRC framework. Paper presented at the Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods and Techniques (DIS 2004), Slovakia: 279–88
Chun, M. M., and Wolfe, J. 2001. Visual attention, in Goldstein, E. B. (ed.), Blackwell's Handbook of Perception. Oxford: Blackwell: 272– 310Google Scholar
Clauzel, D., Roda, C., and Stojanov, G. 2006. Tracking task context to support resumption. Paper presented at the HCI 2006 workshop on computer assisted recording, pre-processing, and analysis of user interaction data, London: 43–54
Colom, R., Rebollo, I., Abad, F. J., and Shih, P. C. 2006. Complex span tasks, simple span tasks, and cognitive abilities: A reanalysis of key studies, Memory and Cognition 34(1): 158–71CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Compton, R. J. 2003. The interface between emotion and attention: A review of evidence from psychology and neuroscience, Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews 2(2): 115–29CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Conway, A. R. A., Cowan, N., Bunting, M. F., Therriault, D. J., and Minkoff, S. R. B. 2002. A latent variable analysis of working memory capacity, short-term memory capacity, processing speed, and general fluid intelligence, Intelligence 30: 163–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conway, A. R. A., Moore, A. B., and Kane, M. J. 2009. Recent trends in the cognitive neuroscience of working memory, Cortex 45(2): 262–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowan, N. 1988. Evolving conceptions of memory storage, selective attention, and their mutual constraints within the human information-processing system, Psychological Bulletin 104(2): 163–91CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cowan, N., Morey, C. C., Chen, Z., Gilchrist, A. L., and Saults, J. S. 2008. Theory and measurement of working memory capacity limits, The Psychology of Learning and Motivation 49: 49–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cutrell, E., Czerwinski, M., and Horvitz, E. 2001. Notification, disruption, and memory: Effects of messaging interruptions on memory and performance. Paper presented at the Interact 2001 IFIP Conference on Human–Computer Interaction, Tokyo: 263–9
Czerwinski, M., Cutrell, E., and Horvitz, E. 2000. Instant messaging: Effects of relevance and time. Paper presented at the HCI 2000 – 14th British HCI Group Annual Conference: 71–6
Czerwinski, M., and Horvitz, E. 2002. An investigation of memory for daily computing events. Paper presented at the HCI 2002: 230–45
Czerwinski, M., Horvitz, E., and Wilhite, S. 2004. A diary study of task switching and interruptions. Paper presented at the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Vienna: 175–82
Desimone, R., and Duncan, J. 1995. Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention, Annual Review of Neuroscience 18: 193–222CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Diamond, A. 2005. Attention-deficit disorder (attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder without hyperactivity), A neurobiologically and behaviorally distinct disorder from attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (with hyperactivity), Development and Psychopathology 17: 807–25CrossRef
Dijksterhuis, A., Bos, M. W., Nordgren, L. F., and van Baaren, R. B. 2006. On making the right choice: The deliberation-without-attention effect, Science 311: 1005–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Driver, J. 2001. A selective review of selective attention research from the past century, British Journal of Psychology 92: 53–78CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Driver, J., Davis, G., Russell, C., Turatto, M., and Freeman, E. 2001. Segmentation, attention and phenomenal visual objects, Cognition 80(1–2): 61–95CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duncan, J., and Humphreys, G. W. 1989. Visual search and stimulus similarity, Psychological Review 96(3): 433–58CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duncan, J., Martens, S., and Ward, R. 1997. Restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities, Nature 387(6635): 808–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eichenbaum, H. 1997. Declarative memory: Insights from cognitive neurobiology, Annual Review of Psychology 48(1): 547–72CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eilan, N., Hoerl, C., McCormack, T., and Roessler, J. (eds.) 2005. Joint Attention: Communication and Other Minds. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Einstein, G. O., and McDaniel, M. A. 1996. Retrieval processes in prospective memory: Theoretical approaches and some new empirical findings, in Brandimonte, M., Einstein, G. O. and McDaniel, M. A. (eds.), Prospective Memory: Theory and Applications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: 115–42Google Scholar
Eisenhauer, M., Lorenz, A., Zimmermann, A., Duong, T. V., and James, F. 2005. Interaction by movement – One giant leap for natural interaction in mobile guides. Paper presented at the mobileHCI 05, Salzburg: www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/~kc/mguides05/pdfs/Eisenhauer_InteractionMovement.pdf (retrieved July 2010)
Eldridge, M., Sellen, A., and Bekerian, D. 1992. Memory Problems at Work: Their Range, Frequency, and Severity (Technical Report EPC-1992-129) Rank Xerox Research CentreGoogle Scholar
Engle, R. W. 2002. Working memory capacity as executive attention, Current Directions in Psychological Science 11(1): 19–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engle, R. W., Kane, M. J., and Tuholski, S. W. 1999. Individual differences in working memory capacity and what they tell us about controlled attention, general fluid intelligence, and functions of the prefrontal cortex, in A. Miyake and P. Shah (eds.), Models of Working Memory: Mechanisms of Active Maintenance and Executive Control. New York: Cambridge University Press: 102–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engle, R. W., Tuholski, S. W., Laughlin, J. E., and Conway, A. R. A. 1999. Working memory, short-term memory, and general fluid intelligence: A latent-variable approach, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 128(3): 309–31CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fahy, F. L., Riches, I. P., and Brown, M. W. 1993. Neuronal activity related to visual recognition memory: Long-term memory and the encoding of recency and familiarity information in the primate anterior and medial inferior temporal and rhinal cortex, Experimental Brain Research 96(3): 457–72CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fernandez-Duque, D., and Johnson, M. 2002. Cause and effect theories of attention: The role of conceptual metaphors, Review of General Psychology 6(2): 153–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, G. E. 1987. Experimentus interruptus, SIGCHI Bulletin 19(2): 42–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fogarty, J., Hudson, S. E., Atkeson, C. G., Avrahami, D., Forlizzi, J., Kiesler, S., et al. 2005. Predicting human interruptibility with sensors, ACM Transactions on Computer–Human Interaction 12(1): 119–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franconeri, S. L., and Simons, D. J. 2003. Moving and looming stimuli capture attention, Perception and Psychophysics 65(7): 999–1010CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Franke, J. L., Daniels, J. J., and McFarlane, D. C. 2002. Recovering context after interruption. Paper presented at the 24th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci 2002): 310–15
Freeman, E., and Gelernter, D. 2007. Beyond lifestreams: The inevitable demise of the desktop metaphor, in Kaptelinin, and Czerwinski, : 19–48
Frischen, A., Bayliss, A. P., and Tipper, S. P. 2007. Gaze cueing of attention: Visual attention, social cognition, and individual differences, Psychological Bulletin 133(4): 694–724CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Furnas, G. W. 1999. The FISHEYE view: A new look at structured files, in S. K. Card, J. Mackinlay and B. Shneiderman (eds.), Readings in Information Visualization: Using Vision to Think. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann: 312–30Google Scholar
Gibson, B. S., Folk, C., Theeuwes, J., and Kingstone, A. (eds.) 2008. Attentional capture, a special issue of Visual Cognition 16(2/3): Psychology Press
Gibson, B. S., and Peterson, M. A. 2001. Inattentional blindness and attentional capture: Evidence for attention-based theories of visual salience, in Folk, C. L. and Gibson, B. S. (eds.), Attraction, Distraction and Action: Multiple Perspectives on Attentional Capture. New York: Elsevier Science: 51–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gievska, S., Lindeman, R., and Sibert, J. 2005. Examining the qualitative gains of mediating human interruptions during HCI. Paper presented at the 11th International Conference on Human–Computer Interaction (HCI International 2005). Mahwah, NJ: 605–14
Gillie, T., and Broadbent, D. 1989. What makes interruptions disruptive? A study of length, similarity, and complexity, Psychological Research 50(4): 243–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldman-Rakic, P. S. 1987. Circuitry of the prefrontal cortex and the regulation of behavior by representational memory, in Mountcastle, V. B., Plum, F. and Geiger, S. R. (eds.), Handbook of Neurobiology. Bethesda, MD: American Physiological Society: 373–417Google Scholar
Gonzalez, V. M., and Mark, G. 2004. ‘Constant, constant, multi-tasking craziness’: Managing multiple working spheres. Paper presented at the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Vienna: 113–20
Grundgeiger, T., and Sanderson, P. 2009. Interruptions in healthcare: Theoretical views, International Journal of Medical Informatics 78(5): 293–307CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Healey, C. G., Booth, K. S., and Enns, J. T. 1996. High-speed visual estimation using preattentive processing, ACM Transactions on Computer–Human Interaction 3(2): 107–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Healey, C. G., and Enns, J. T. 1999. Large datasets at a glance: Combining textures and colors in scientific visualization, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 5(2): 145–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillyard, S. A., Vogel, E. K., and Luck, S. J. 1998. Sensory gain control (amplification) as a mechanism of selective attention: Electro-physiological and neuroimaging evidence, Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences 353(1373): 1257–70Google Scholar
Ho, C., Tan, H. Z., and Spence, C. 2005. Using spatial vibrotactile cues to direct visual attention in driving scenes, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 8(6): 397–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ho, C.-Y., Nikolic, M. I., Waters, M. J., and Sarter, N. B. 2004. Not now! Supporting interruption management by indicating the modality and urgency of pending tasks, Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46: 399–409CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ho, J., and Intille, S. S. 2005. Using context-aware computing to reduce the perceived burden of interruptions from mobile devices. Paper presented at the CHI 2005. Portland, OR: 909–18
Hommel, B. 2010. Grounding attention in action control: The intentional control of selection, in Bruya, B. J. (ed.), Effortless Attention: A New Perspective in the Cognitive Science of Attention and Action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press: 121–40Google Scholar
Hommel, B., Ridderinkhof, K. R., and Theeuwes, J. 2002. Cognitive control of attention and action: Issues and trends, Psychological Research 66(4): 215–19CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horvitz, E., Kadie, C., Paek, T., and Hovel, D. 2003. Models of attention in computing and communication: From principles to applications, Communications of the ACM 46(3): 52–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huberman, B. A. 2008. Crowdsourcing and attention, Computer 41(11): 103–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hudson, J. M., Christensen, J., Kellogg, W. A., and Erickson, T. 2002. ‘I'd be overwhelmed, but it's just one more thing to do’: Availability and interruption in research management. Paper presented at the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Minneapolis: 97–104
Hudson, S. E., Fogarty, J., Atkeson, C. G., Avrahami, D., Forlizzi, J., Kiesler, S., et al. 2003. Predicting human interruptibility with sensors: A Wizard of Oz feasibility study. Paper presented at the CHI 2003. Fort Lauderdale, FL: 257–64
Hussain, F., and Wood, S. 2009. Modelling the efficiencies and interactions of attentional networks, in Paletta, L. and Tsotsos, J. K. (eds.), Attention in Cognitive Systems. Berlin: Springer-Verlag: 139–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iqbal, S. T., Adamczyk, P. D., Zheng, X. S., and Bailey, B. P. 2005. Towards an index of opportunity: Understanding changes in mental workload during task execution. Paper presented at the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Portland, OR: 311–20
Itti, L. 2005. Models of bottom-up attention and saliency, in Itti, L., Rees, G. and Tsotsos, J. K. (eds.), Neurobiology of Attention. San Diego: Elsevier: 576–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Itti, L., Koch, C., and Niebur, E. 1998. A model of saliency-based visual attention for rapid scene analysis, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 29: 1254–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jameson, A., Schafer, R., Weis, T., Berthold, A., and Weyrath, T. 1999. Making systems sensitive to the user's time and working memory constraints, in Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Los Angeles: ACM Press: 79–86Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. 1973. Attention and Effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice HallGoogle Scholar
Kaptelinin, V., and Czerwinski, M. (eds.) 2007. Beyond the Desktop Metaphor: Designing Integrated Digital Work Environments. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Kardiasmenos, K. S., Clawson, D. M., Wilken, J. A., and Wallin, M. T. 2008. Prospective memory and the efficacy of a memory strategy in multiple sclerosis, Neuropsychology 22(6): 746–54CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karger, D. R. 2007. Haystack: Per-user information environment based on semistructured data, in Kaptelinin, and Czerwinski, : 49–100
Kliegel, M., Mackinlay, R., and Jäger, T. 2008. Complex prospective memory: Development across the lifespan and the role of task interruption, Developmental Psychology 44(2): 612–17CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kliegel, M., and Martin, M. 2003. Prospective memory research: Why is it relevant? International Journal of Psychology 38(4): 193–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, C., and Tsuchiya, N. 2007. Attention and consciousness: Two distinct brain processes, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 11(1): 16–22CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kvavilashvili, L., Messer, D. J., and Ebdon, P. 2001. Prospective memory in children: The effects of age and task interruption, Developmental Psychology 37(3): 418–30CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
LaBerge, D. 2002. Attentional control: Brief and prolonged, Psychological Research 66(4): 220–33CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lamming, M., Brown, P., Carter, K., Eldridge, M., Flynn, M., Louie, G., et al. 1994. The design of a human memory prosthesis, Computer Journal 37(3): 153–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamming, M., and Flynn, M. 1994. ‘Forget-me-not’: Intimate computing in support of human memory. Paper presented at the FRIEND21 Symposium on Next Generation Human Interfaces, Tokyo. Also available as RXRC TR 94–103, 61 Regent St, Cambridge, UK
Lamping, J., and Rao, R. 1994. Laying out and visualizing large trees using a hyperbolic space. Paper presented at the 7th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. Marina del Rey, CA
Latorella, K. A. 1998. Effects of modality on interrupted flight deck performance: Implications for data link. Paper presented at the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Meeting, Santa Monica, CA: 87–91
Laukkanen, J., Roda, C., and Molenaar, I. 2007. Modelling tasks: A requirements analysis based on attention support services. Paper presented at the workshop on contextualized attention metadata: personalized access to digital resources, CAMA 2007 at the ACM IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, 17–23 June 2007, Vancouver: 1–7
Lavie, N. 2005. Distracted and confused? Selective attention under load, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9: 75–82CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lavie, N., Hirst, A., Fockert, J. W., and Viding, E. 2004. Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 133(3): 339–54CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lavie, N., and Tsal, Y. 1994. Perceptual load as a major determinant of the locus of selection in visual attention, Perception and Psychophysics 56(2): 183–97CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lim, S.-L., Padmala, S., and Pessoa, L. 2008. Affective learning modulates spatial competition during low-load conditions, Neuropsychologia 46(5): 1267–78CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Logan, G. D. 1988. Toward an instance theory of automatization, Psychological Review 95(4): 492–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Logan, G. D. 1992. Attention and preattention in theories of automaticity, American Journal of Psychology 105(2): 317–39CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mack, A. 2003. Inattentional blindness: Looking without seeing, Current Directions in Psychological Science 12(5): 180–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mack, A., and Rock, I. 1998. Inattentional Blindness. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Mark, G., Gonzalez, V. M., and Harris, J. 2005. No task left behind? Examining the nature of fragmented work. Paper presented at the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Portland, OR: 321–30
Marsh, R. L., Hicks, J. L., and Bryan, E. S. 1999. The activation of un-related and canceled intentions, Memory and Cognition 27(2): 320–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mase, K., Sumi, Y., and Fels, S. 2007. Welcome to the special issue on memory and sharing of experience for the Journal of Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, Journal of Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 11(4): 213–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCrickard, D. S., Catrambone, R., Chewar, C. M., and Stasko, J. T. 2003. Establishing tradeoffs that leverage attention for utility: Empirically evaluating information display in notification systems, International Journal of Human–Computer Studies 58(5): 547–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCrickard, D. S., and Chewar, C. M. 2003. Attuning notification design to user goals and attention costs, Communications of the ACM 46(3): 67–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDaniel, M. A., Guynn, M. J., Einstein, G. O., and Breneiser, J. 2004. Cue-focused and reflexive-associative processes in prospective memory retrieval, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 30(3): 605–14Google ScholarPubMed
McFarlane, D. C., and Latorella, K. A. 2002. The scope and importance of human interruption in human–computer interaction design, Human–Computer Interaction 17(1): 1–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMains, S. A., and Somers, D. C. 2004. Multiple spotlights of attentional selection in human visual cortex, Neuron 42: 677–86CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNab, F., and Klingberg, T. 2008. Prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia control access to working memory, Nature Neuroscience 11(1): 103–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meiran, N., Chorev, Z., and Sapir, A. 2000. Component processes in task switching, Cognitive Psychology 41(3): 211–53CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, G. A. 1956. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information, Psychological Review 63: 81–97CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Molenaar, I., and Roda, C. 2008. Attention management for dynamic and adaptive scaffolding, Pragmatics and Cognition 16(2): 225–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monsell, S. 2003. Task switching, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7(3): 134–40CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moore, C., and Dunham, P. J. (eds.) 1995. Joint Attention: Its Origins and Role in Development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum AssociatesGoogle Scholar
Nagata, S. F. 2003. Multitasking and interruptions during mobile web tasks. Paper presented at the 47th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society: 1341–5
Navalpakkam, V., and Itti, L. 2006. An integrated model of top-down and bottom-up attention for optimal object detection. Paper presented at the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR): 2049–56
Navon, D., and Miller, J. 1987. Role of outcome conflict in dual-task interference, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 13: 435–48Google ScholarPubMed
Nisbett, R. E., and Masuda, T. 2003. Culture and point of view, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100(19): 11163–70CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Norman, D., and Shallice, T. 1986. Attention to action: Willed and automatic control of behavior, in Davidson, R. J., Schwartz, G. E. and Shapiro, D. (eds.), Consciousness and Self-Regulation. New York: Plenum: vol. IV: 1–18Google Scholar
Oberauer, K. 2002. Access to information in working memory: Exploring the focus of attention, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 28(3): 411–21Google ScholarPubMed
Obermayer, R. W., and Nugent, W. A. 2000. Human–computer interaction for alert warning and attention allocation systems of the multi-modal watchstation. Paper presented at the SPIE 2000 – The International Society for Optical Engineering: 14–22
O'Conaill, B., and Frohlich, D. 1995. Timespace in the workplace: Dealing with interruptions. Paper presented at the CHI '95 Conference, Denver, CO: 262–3
Olivers, C. N. L., and Nieuwenhuis, S. 2005. The beneficial effect of concurrent task-irrelevant mental activity on temporal attention, Psychological Science 16: 265–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Regan, J. K. 1992. Solving the ‘real’ mysteries of visual perception: The world as an outside memory, Canadian Journal of Psychology 46(3): 461–88CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Regan, J. K., and Noë, A. 2001. A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24(5): 939–1031CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oulasvirta, A. 2004. Task demands and memory in web interaction: A levels-of-processing approach, Interacting with Computers 16(2): 217–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oulasvirta, A., Kärkkäinen, L., and Laarni, J. 2005. Expectations and memory in link search, Computers in Human Behavior 21(5): 773–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oulasvirta, A., and Salovaara, A. 2004. A cognitive meta-analysis of design approaches to interruptions in intelligent environments, in Extended Abstracts of the 2004 Conference on Human Factors and Computing Systems. Vienna: ACM Press: 1155–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parasuraman, R., and Davis, D. R. (eds.) 1984. Varieties of Attention. San Diego: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
Pashler, H. 1994. Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory, Psychological Bulletin 116(2): 220–44CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pashler, H. 2000. Task switching and multitask performance, in Monsell, S. and Driver, J. (eds.), Attention and Performance XVIII: Control of Mental Processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press: 277–308Google Scholar
Pashler, H., and Johnston, J. C. 1998. Attentional limitations in dual-task performance, in Pashler, H. (ed.), Attention. Hove: Psychology Press: 155–189Google Scholar
Pêcher, C., Lemercier, C., and Cellier, J.-M. 2009. Emotions drive attention: Effects on driver's behaviour. Safety Science 47(9): 1254–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polster, M. R., Nadel, L., and Schacter, D. L. 2007. Cognitive neuroscience analyses of memory: A historical perspective, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 3(2): 95–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posner, M. I. 1982. Cumulative development of attention theory, American Psychologist 37: 168–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posner, M. I. 1994. Attention: The mechanisms of consciousness, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 91(16): 7398–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posner, M. I., and Fan, J. 2007. Attention as an organ system, in Pomerantz, J. (ed.), Neurobiology of Perception and Communication: From Synapse to Society. The IVth De Lange Conference. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Posner, M. I., and Rothbart, M. K. 2007. Research on attention networks as a model for the integration of psychological science, Annual Review of Psychology 58(1): 1–23CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Postle, B. R. 2006. Working memory as an emergent property of the mind and brain, Neuroscience 139(1): 23–38CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raskin, J. 2000. The Humane Interface: New Directions for Designing Interactive Systems. New York: Addison-WesleyGoogle Scholar
Ratwani, R. M., Andrews, A. E., Sousk, J. D., and Trafton, J. G. 2008. The effect of interruption modality on primary task resumption, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting Proceedings 52: 393–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rensink, R. A. 2007. The modeling and control of visual perception, in Gray, W. (ed.), Integrated Models of Cognitive Systems. New York: Oxford University Press: 132–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, T. J., Prabhakararao, S., Burnett, M., Cook, C., Ruthruff, J. R., Beckwith, L., et al. 2004. Impact of interruption style on end-user debugging. Paper presented at the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Vienna: 287–94
Roda, C., and Nabeth, T. 2007. Supporting attention in learning environments: Attention support services and information management. Paper presented at Creating New Experiences on a Global Scale. Second European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning, EC-TEL 2007, Crete: 277–91
Roda, C., Stojanov, G., and Clauzel, D. 2006. Mind-prosthesis metaphor for design of human–computer interfaces that support better attention management. Paper presented at the AAAI 2006 Fall Symposium on ‘Interaction and Emergent Phenomena in Societies of Agents’, Arlington, VA: 52–9
Roda, C., and Thomas, J. 2006. Attention aware systems: Theories, applications, and research agenda, Computers in Human Behavior 22(4): 557–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, R., and Monsell, S. 1995. Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 124(2): 207–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarter, N. 2005. Graded and multimodal interruption cueing in support of preattentive reference and attention management, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting Proceedings 49: 478–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarter, N. 2006. Multiple-resource theory as a basis for multimodal interface design: Success stories, qualifications, and research needs, in Kramer, A. F., Wiegmann, D. A. and Kirlik, A. (eds.), Attention: From Theory to Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 187–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schacter, D. L. 1987. Implicit memory: History and current status, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 13(3): 501–18Google Scholar
Schill, K., Zetzsche, C., and Hois, J. 2009. A belief-based architecture for scene analysis: From sensorimotor features to knowledge and ontology, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 160(10): 1507–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholl, B. J. 2001. Objects and attention: The state of the art, Cognition 80(1–2): 1–46CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sellen, A. J., Louie, G., Harris, J. E., and Wilkins, A. J. 1997. What brings intentions to mind? An in situ study of prospective memory, Memory 5(4): 483–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simons, D. J. Visual cognition lab – demos and stimuli. Retrieved June 2009 from: http://viscog.beckman.illinois.edu/djs_lab/demos.html.
Simons, D. J., and Chabris, C. F. 1999. Gorillas in our midst: Sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events, Perception 28(9): 1059–74CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simons, D. J., and Rensink, R. A. 2005. Change blindness: past, present, and future, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9(1): 16–20CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Somervell, J., McCrickard, D. S., North, C., and Shukla, M. 2002. An evaluation of information visualization in attention-limited environments. Paper presented at the Symposium on Data Visualisation 2002, Barcelona
Speier, C., Vessey, I., and Valacich, J. S. 2003. The effects of interruptions, task complexity, and information presentation on computer-supported decision-making performance, Decision Sciences 34(4): 771–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spence, R. 2002. Rapid, serial and visual: A presentation technique with potential, Information Visualization 1(1): 13–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stinson, C. 2009. Searching for the source of executive attention, Psyche 15(1): 137–54Google Scholar
Takegata, R., Brattico, E., Tervaniemi, M., Varyagina, O., Näätänen, R., and Winkler, I. N. 2005. Preattentive representation of feature conjunctions for concurrent spatially distributed auditory objects, Cognitive Brain Research 25(1): 169–79CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thorpe, S., Fize, D., and Marlot, C. 1996. Speed of processing in the human visual system, Nature (381): 520–2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Toet, A. 2006. Gaze directed displays as an enabling technology for attention aware systems, Computers in Human Behavior 22(4): 615–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treisman, A. 1960. Contextual cues in selective listening, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 12: 242–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treisman, A. 1985. Preattentive processing in vision, Computer Vision, Graphics and Image Processing 31(2): 156–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treisman, A., and Gelade, G. 1980. A feature-integration theory of attention, Cognitive Psychology 12: 97–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treisman, A., Vieira, A., and Hayes, A. 1992. Automaticity and preattentive processing, American Journal of Psychology 105(2): 341–62CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tulving, E. 1972. Episodic and semantic memory, in Tulving, E. and Donaldson, W. (eds.), Organization of Memory. New York: Academic Press: 382–402Google Scholar
Unsworth, N., and Engle, R. W. 2007. On the division of short-term and working memory: An examination of simple and complex span and their relation to higher order abilities, Psychological Bulletin 133(6): 1038–66CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Velichkovsky, B. M. 1995. Communicating attention: Gaze position transfer in cooperative problem solving, Pragmatics and Cognition 3(2): 199–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vemuri, S., and Bender, W. 2004. Next-generation personal memory aids, BT Technology Journal 22(4): 125–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ware, C. 2000. Information Visualization: Perception for Design. San Francisco: Morgan KaufmannGoogle Scholar
Welford, A. T. 1952. The ‘psychological refractory period’ and the timing of high-speed performance: A review and a theory, British Journal of Psychology 43: 2–19Google Scholar
Wickens, C. D. 2002. Multiple resources and performance prediction, Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 3(2): 159–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, B. A., Evans, J. J., Emslie, H., Alderman, N., and Burgess, P. 1998. The development of an ecologically valid test for assessing patients with a dysexecutive syndrome, Neuropsychological Rehabilitation 8(3): 213–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winkler, I. N., Czigler, I. N., Sussman, E., Horváth, J. N., and Balázs, L. S. 2005. Preattentive binding of auditory and visual stimulus features, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 17(2): 320–39CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wixted, J. T. 2004. The psychology and neuroscience of forgetting, Annual Review of Psychology 55(1): 235–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfe, J. M. 2001. The level of attention: Mediating between the stimulus and perception, in Harris, L. and M. Jenkin (eds.), Levels of Perception: A Festschrift for Ian Howard. New York: Springer Verlag; draft of 8/2/01, 12:06 p.m. retrieved 15 February 2005 from http://search.bwh.harvard.edu/pdf/Festschrift.pdfGoogle Scholar
Woods, D. D. 1995. The alarm problem and directed attention in dynamic fault management, Ergonomics 38(11): 2371–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, R. D. 1998. Visual Attention. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Yantis, S. 2000. Goal-directed and stimulus-driven determinants of attentional control, Attention and Performance 18: 73–103Google Scholar
Zijlstra, F. R. H., Roe, R. A., Leonova, A. B., and Krediet, I. 1999. Temporal factors in mental work: Effects of interrupted activities, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 72: 163–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmermann, T. D., and Meier, B. 2010. The effect of implementation intentions on prospective memory performance across the lifespan, Applied Cognitive Psychology 24(5): 645–58

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×