Hommel Bernhard, Chapman Craig S, Cisek Paul, Neyedli Heather F, Song Joo-Hyun, Welsh Timothy N
Institute of Psychology, Cognitive Psychology Unit and Leiden Institute for Brain and Cognition, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Faculty of Kinesiology, Sport, and Recreation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2019 Oct;81(7):2288-2303. doi: 10.3758/s13414-019-01846-w.
In this article, we challenge the usefulness of "attention" as a unitary construct and/or neural system. We point out that the concept has too many meanings to justify a single term, and that "attention" is used to refer to both the explanandum (the set of phenomena in need of explanation) and the explanans (the set of processes doing the explaining). To illustrate these points, we focus our discussion on visual selective attention. It is argued that selectivity in processing has emerged through evolution as a design feature of a complex multi-channel sensorimotor system, which generates selective phenomena of "attention" as one of many by-products. Instead of the traditional analytic approach to attention, we suggest a synthetic approach that starts with well-understood mechanisms that do not need to be dedicated to attention, and yet account for the selectivity phenomena under investigation. We conclude that what would serve scientific progress best would be to drop the term "attention" as a label for a specific functional or neural system and instead focus on behaviorally relevant selection processes and the many systems that implement them.
在本文中,我们对将“注意力”作为一个单一结构和/或神经系统的有用性提出质疑。我们指出,该概念含义过多,无法用一个单一术语来合理涵盖,而且“注意力”既用于指代被解释项(需要解释的一系列现象),也用于指代解释项(进行解释的一系列过程)。为说明这些观点,我们将讨论聚焦于视觉选择性注意。有人认为,加工过程中的选择性是作为一个复杂多通道感觉运动系统的设计特征在进化过程中出现的,该系统产生“注意力”的选择性现象作为众多副产品之一。我们建议采用一种综合方法,而非传统的对注意力的分析方法,这种综合方法从已充分理解的机制入手,这些机制无需专门用于注意力,但却能解释所研究的选择性现象。我们的结论是,最有利于科学进步的做法是摒弃“注意力”这一术语,不再将其作为特定功能或神经系统的标签,而是专注于与行为相关的选择过程以及实现这些过程的众多系统。