Working Memory and Attention – Response to Commentaries
This is a brief reply to the commentaries by Adam and deBettencourt (2019); Allen (2019); Kiyonaga (2019); Schneider (2019); and Van der Stigchel and Olivers (2019), focusing on four topics: (1) I defend the idea that attention need not be characterized as a limited resource. (2) I explain how I con...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Ubiquity Press
2019-08-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Cognition |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.journalofcognition.org/articles/79 |
| Summary: | This is a brief reply to the commentaries by Adam and deBettencourt (2019); Allen (2019); Kiyonaga (2019); Schneider (2019); and Van der Stigchel and Olivers (2019), focusing on four topics: (1) I defend the idea that attention need not be characterized as a limited resource. (2) I explain how I conceptualize the role of WM in cognitive control, and how recruitment of sensory processing networks contributes to control but not maintenance. (3) I discuss different ways in which information can be selectively prioritized during or after being encoded into WM, and the different consequences of these processes. (4) I argue that sustained attention to a task can be understood as the mind’s ability to prioritize that task over task-unrelated representations. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2514-4820 |