Distribution of attention, of some sort, is granted. It is generally
conceded that there must be some sort of overlapping of the processes
in any complex mental operation. But there is the greatest lack
of information as to how this overlapping takes place,--as to the
mechanism of the distribution of attention. Fechner held to the notion
of a fixed maximum of available psychophysical energy. If this energy
is being consumed in a single process, that process is very vivid, and
all other processes are below the threshold. If, on the other hand, it
is distributed over several simultaneous processes, they are all of
diminished vividness. Distribution of attention always means diminution
of vividness, and concentration of attention, increase of vividness.
(See Elemente der Psychophysik, vol. 2, p. 451, 1860.) There is no
question of the truth of the last statement, and very likely Fechner's
fundamental concept is a true one; but there is need of more definite
data on the conditions and nature of simple mental processes occurring
at the same time, before it is considered proved.
Such researches as those of Paulhan,[115] Jastrow,[116] Loeb,[117]
and De Sanctis[118] all dealt with the combination of processes which
were themselves quite complex. It may well be that such processes as
reciting a poem, performing a subtraction or multiplication of long
numbers on paper, or keeping time with a metronome with the hand, seem
to go along together when combined, so that the time taken to do the
two of them together is much less than the sum of the times required
for their separate performance, and, in some cases, no greater than the
time required for either alone, and yet there may be no real proceeding
together. The apparent saving of time may be due, as Paulhan suggested,
to a rapid oscillation from one to the other of the two complex
processes which are largely automatic and can proceed, to such extent
as they are automatic, without any attention. This illustrates how
these investigations have probably missed the real point at issue with
regard to the division and distribution of attention. The attention
might be distributed over several of the minuter part-processes of
these processes so that many were proceeding at the same time, and yet
the method of these experiments would not reveal it. They were not
planned with sufficient precision. There is a problem in the division
of attention which they did not come within sight of, and this is the
real question of division in case of the simplest processes.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account