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 |
| _version_ | 1819228113029038080 |
|---|---|
| author | Klaus Oberauer |
| author_facet | Klaus Oberauer |
| author_sort | Klaus Oberauer |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | 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. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-23T10:52:07Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-49d111cff8634d04927be2c706784dc2 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2514-4820 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-23T10:52:07Z |
| publishDate | 2019-08-01 |
| publisher | Ubiquity Press |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Cognition |
| spelling | doaj.art-49d111cff8634d04927be2c706784dc22022-12-21T17:49:52ZengUbiquity PressJournal of Cognition2514-48202019-08-012110.5334/joc.7970Working Memory and Attention – Response to CommentariesKlaus Oberauer0University of ZurichThis 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.https://www.journalofcognition.org/articles/79AttentionWorking memoryMemory |
| spellingShingle | Klaus Oberauer Working Memory and Attention – Response to Commentaries Journal of Cognition Attention Working memory Memory |
| title | Working Memory and Attention – Response to Commentaries |
| title_full | Working Memory and Attention – Response to Commentaries |
| title_fullStr | Working Memory and Attention – Response to Commentaries |
| title_full_unstemmed | Working Memory and Attention – Response to Commentaries |
| title_short | Working Memory and Attention – Response to Commentaries |
| title_sort | working memory and attention response to commentaries |
| topic | Attention Working memory Memory |
| url | https://www.journalofcognition.org/articles/79 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT klausoberauer workingmemoryandattentionresponsetocommentaries |