Bruya Brian, Tang Yi-Yuan
Department of History and Philosophy, Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilanti, MI, United States.
Department of Psychological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, United States.
Front Psychol. 2018 Sep 6;9:1133. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01133. eCollection 2018.
Daniel Kahneman was not the first to suggest that attention and effort are closely associated, but his 1973 book , which claimed that attention can be identified with effort, cemented the association as a research paradigm in the cognitive sciences. Since then, the paradigm has rarely been questioned and appears to have set the research agenda so that it is self-reinforcing. In this article, we retrace Kahneman's argument to understand its strengths and weaknesses. The central notion of effort is not clearly defined in the book, so we proceed by constructing the most secure inferences we can from Kahneman's argument regarding effort: it is cognitive, objective, metabolic expenditure, and it is attention. Continuing, we find from Kahneman's argument that effort-attention must be a special case of sympathetic dominance of the autonomic nervous system that is also an increase in metabolic activity in the brain that has crossed a threshold of magnitude. We then weigh this conception of effort against evidence in Kahneman's book and against more recent evidence, finding that it does not warrant the conclusion that effort can be equated with attention. In support of an alternative perspective, we briefly review diverse studies of behavior, physiology, and neuroscience on attention and effort, including meditation and studies of the LC-NE system, where we find evidence for the following: (1) Attention seems to be associated not with the utilization of metabolic resources but with the readying of metabolic resources in the form of adaptive gain modulation. This occurs under sympathetic dominance and can be experienced as effortful. (2) Attention can also occur under parasympathetic dominance, in which case it is likely to be experienced as effortless.
丹尼尔·卡尼曼并非首个提出注意力与努力密切相关的人,但他在1973年出版的书中声称注意力可等同于努力,这使得这种关联成为认知科学中的一种研究范式。从那时起,这一范式很少受到质疑,而且似乎设定了研究议程,从而形成了自我强化。在本文中,我们追溯卡尼曼的论证,以了解其优点和缺点。书中对努力这一核心概念并未给出明确界定,因此我们通过从卡尼曼关于努力的论证中构建最可靠的推论来展开:它是认知性的、客观的、代谢消耗,且就是注意力。接着,我们从卡尼曼的论证中发现,努力-注意力必定是自主神经系统交感优势的一种特殊情形,同时也是大脑中代谢活动的增加且已超过一定量级阈值。然后,我们将这种对努力的概念与卡尼曼书中的证据以及最新证据进行权衡,发现它并不足以支持努力可等同于注意力这一结论。为支持另一种观点,我们简要回顾了关于注意力和努力的行为学、生理学及神经科学方面的多样研究,包括冥想以及对蓝斑-去甲肾上腺素能系统的研究,在这些研究中我们发现了以下证据:(1)注意力似乎并非与代谢资源的利用相关,而是与以适应性增益调制形式准备代谢资源相关。这发生在交感优势状态下,并且可能会被体验为费力。(2)注意力也可在副交感优势状态下出现,在这种情况下它可能会被体验为轻松。