Scientific concepts are defined by metaphors. These metaphors determine what attention is and what count as adequate explanations of the phenomenon. The authors analyze these metaphors within 3 types of attention theories: (a) “cause” theories, in which attention is presumed to modulate information processing (e.g., attention as a spotlight; attention as a limited resource); (b) “effect” theories, in which attention is considered to be a by-product of information processing (e.g., the competition metaphor); and (c) hybrid theories that combine cause and effect aspects (e.g., biased-competition models). The present analysis reveals the crucial role of metaphors in cognitive psychology, neuroscience, and the efforts of scientists to find a resolution to the classic problem of cause versus effect interpretations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaarsB. J. (1997). In the theater of consciousness: The workspace of the mind. New York: Oxford University Press.
2.
BehrmannM., & HaimsonC. (1999). The cognitive neuroscience of visual attention. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 9, 158–163.
3.
BrefczynskiJ. A., & DeYoeE. A. (1999). A physiological correlate of the ‘spotlight’ of visual attention. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 370–374.
4.
BroadbentD. (1958). Perception and communication. New York: Pergamon Press.
5.
CarpenterP. A., JustM. A., KellerT. A., EddyW., & ThulbornK. (1999). Graded functional activation in the visuospatial system with the amount of task demand. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 11, 9–24.
6.
CaseR. (1985). Intellectual development: Birth to adulthood. New York: Academic Press.
7.
CaveK. R., & BichotN. P. (1999). Visuospatial attention: Beyond a spotlight model. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 204–223.
8.
ChawlaD., ReesG., & FristonK. J. (1999). The biological bases of attentional modulation in the extrastriate visual cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 671–676.
9.
ChristieJ., & KleinR. M. (1996). Assessing the evidence for novel pop-out. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125, 201–207.
10.
CohenJ. D., RomeroR. D., Servan-SchreiberD., & FarahM. J. (1994). Mechanisms of spatial attention: The relation of macrostructure to microstructure in parietal neglect. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 6, 377–383.
11.
CorbettaM., KincadeJ. M., OllingerJ. M., McAvoyM. P., & ShulmanG. L. (2000). Voluntary attention is dissociated from target detection in the human posterior parietal cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 292–297.
12.
CraikF. I. M., & ByrdM. (1982). Aging and cognitive deficits: The role of attentional resources. In CraikF. I. M. & TrehubS., Aging and cognitive processes (pp. 191–211). New York: Plenum.
13.
DennetD. C., & KinsbourneM. (1992). Time and the observer: The where and when of consciousness in the brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 15, 183–247.
14.
DesimoneR., & DuncanJ. (1995). Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 18, 193–222.
15.
DeWeerdP., PeraltaM. R., DesimoneR., & UngerleiderL. G. (1999). Loss of attentional stimulus selection after extrastriate cortical lesions in macaques. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 753–758.
16.
FarahM. J. (1994). Neuropsychological inference with an interactive brain: A critique of the “locality” assumption. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 17, 43–104.
17.
Fernandez-DuqueD., & JohnsonM. L. (1999). Attention metaphors: How metaphors guide the cognitive psychology of attention. Cognitive Science, 23, 83–116.
18.
GibbsR. W. (1994). The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. New York: Cambridge University Press.
19.
HansonN. R. (1958). The patterns of discovery. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
20.
HarnishfegerK. K. (1995). The development of cognitive inhibition: Theories, definitions, and research evidence. In DempsterF. N. & BrainerdC. J., New perspectives on interference and inhibition in cognition (pp. 175–204). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
21.
HasherL., & ZacksR. T. (1979). Automatic and effortful processes in memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 108, 356–388.
22.
HesseM. B. (1966). The explanatory function of metaphor. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
23.
HopfingerJ. B., BuonocuoreM. H., & MangunG. R. (2000). The neural mechanisms of top-down attentional control. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 284–291.
24.
JamesW. (1950). The principles of psychologyNew York: Dover. (Original work published 1890)
25.
JohnsonM. L. (1987). The body in the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
26.
JohnstonW. A., & DarkV. J. (1986). Selective attention. Annual Review of Psychology, 37, 43–75.
27.
KahnemanD. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
28.
KastnerS., DeWeerdP., DesimoneR., & UngerleiderL. G. (1998). Mechanisms of directed attention in the extrastriate cortex as revealed by functional MRI. Science, 282, 108–111.
29.
KinsbourneM. (1977). Hemineglect and hemisphere rivalry. Advances in Neurology, 18, 41–49.
30.
KuhnT. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
31.
LaBergeD. (1995). Attentional processing: The brain's art of mindfulness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32.
LàdavasE., PretronioA., & UmiltàC. (1990). The deployment of visual attention in the intact field of hemineglect patients. Cortex, 26, 307–317.
33.
LakoffG. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
34.
LakoffG., & JohnsonM. L. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
35.
LakoffG., & JohnsonM. L. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.
36.
LakoffG., & NúñezR. E. (2000). Where mathematics comes from: How the embodied mind brings mathematics into being. New York: Basic Books.
37.
LavieN. (1995). Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 451–468.
38.
LogothetisN. K., LeopoldD. A., & SheinbergD. L. (1996). What is rivalling during binocular rivalry?Nature, 380, 621–624.
39.
MartinezA., Anllo-VentoL., SerenoM. I., FrankL. R., BuxtonR. B., & DubowitzD. J. (1999). Involvement of striate and extrastriate visual cortical areas in spatial attention. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 364–369.
40.
MorayN. (1967). Where is capacity limited? A survey and a model. Acta Psychologica, 27, 84–92.
41.
MüllerM. M., Teder-SälejärviW., & HillyardS. A. (1998). The time course of cortical facilitation during cued shifts of spatial attention. Nature Neuroscience, 1, 631–634.
42.
NavonD. (1984). Attention division or attention sharing. In PosnerM. I. & MarinO., Attention and performance XI (pp. 133–146). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
43.
NavonD., & GopherD. (1979). On the economy of the human processing system. Psychological Review, 86, 214–255.
44.
NormanD. A., & BobrowD. G. (1975). On data-limited and resource-limited processes. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 44–64.
45.
O'CravenK. M., DowningP. E., & KanwisherN. (1999). fMRI evidence for objects as the units of attentional selection. Nature, 401, 584–587.
46.
PashlerH. E. (1998). The psychology of attention. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
47.
PosnerM. I. (1994). Attention: The mechanisms of consciousness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 91, 7398–7402.
48.
PosnerM. I., & RothbartM. K. (1986). The concept of energy in psychological theory. In HockeyG. R., GaillardA., & ColesM. G., Energetics and human information processing (pp. 23–40). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
ReesG., FrackowiakR., & FrithC. (1997). Two modulatory effects of attention that mediate object categorization in human cortex. Science, 275, 835–838.
51.
ReynoldsJ. H., ChelazziL., & DesimoneR. (1999). Competitive mechanisms subserve attention in macaque areas V2 and V4. Journal of Neuroscience, 19, 1736–1753.
52.
SchneiderW., & ShiffrinR. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: 1. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 84, 1–66.
53.
SchwartzM. F., BuxbaumL. J., MontgomeryM. W., Fitzpatrick-DeSalmeE., HartT., & FerraroM. (1999). Naturalistic action production following right hemisphere stroke. Neuropsychologia, 37, 51–66.
54.
SeyalM., RoT., & RafalR. (1995). Increased sensitivity to ipsilateral cutaneous stimuli following transcranial magnetic stimulation of the parietal lobe.. Annals of Neurology, 38, 264–267.
55.
ShiffrinR. M. (1988). Attention. In AtkinsonR. C., HerrnsteinR. J., LindzeyG., & LuceR. D., Stevens' handbook of experimental psychology: Learning and cognition (pp. 739–811). New York: Wiley.
56.
TreueS., & MartinezJ. C. (1999). Feature-based attention influences motion processing gain in macaque visual cortex. Nature, 399, 575–579.
57.
UmiltàC. (1988). Orienting of attention. In BollerF. & GrafmanJ., Handbook of neuropsychology (pp. 175–192). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
58.
WatchelP. L. (1967). Conceptions of broad and narrow attention. Psychological Bulletin, 68, 417–429.
59.
WickensR. C. (1984). Processing resources in attention. In ParasuramanR. D. & DaviesD. R., Varieties of attention (pp. 120–142). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
60.
WolfeJ. M. (1996). Resolving perceptual ambiguity. Nature, 380, 587–588.
61.
WoodmanG. F., & LuckS. J. (1999). Electrophysiological measurement of rapid shifts of attention during visual search. Nature, 400, 867–869.
