I think an interesting question for your students (if they are truly interested in the topic) can be: What IS attention alltogehter? As far as I know, there is no all-encopassing answer to that question yet. In that line of thought it might be useful to look at the different methods we use to study attention,e.g. eye tracking, with which I am most familiar with, that serve as an indicator of spatial attention (but not always, see Posner).

One might also ask: When do we need attention, when not? there is e.g.evidence that some kinds of eye movements (smooth pursuit) do not require any ettentional resources, in contrast to most other visual tasks.

My major respects to anyone who teaches this actually quite controversial topic. I have only come to appreciate the complexity of the phenomenon after having been taught the basics in a very simplicstic way.                                                                                                                                                                                        

I would say some of the key concepts in attention are the distinction between exogenous and endogenous attention, as well as the different types of attention, i.e. selective, sustained, divided ....

In regards to working memory, the WM model by Baddeley and Hitch (1974) and the addition of the episodic buffer (Baddeley 2000). and then the different steps of memory processing and the different modes of memory (auditory, visual...). Moreover, maybe a few of the primary tests of how WM is tested in neuropsychology.

Maybe also concepts like preattention vs focal attention, parallel vs serial processing, early vs late selection models/theories and attention as effort (the historical aspect featuring Broadbent, Moray, Treisman, Norman, Deutsch & Deutsch, Kahneman), visual search (Neisser, Treisman, Wolfe). Attention to objects vs attention to locations; automatic vs controlled processes; data-limited vs resource-limited processes. It seems that some classic experimental paradigms come to the fore when these concepts are explained (Eriksen, Posner; Stroop; dichotic listening; eye-movement registration, etc.) Also, some reference to orienting reflex (Sokolov) might be good. One more thing: quite often in the courses and textbooks the topic of attention is limited to selective attention and information-processing models and the issue of attention as alertness and attention as a sustained effort to monitor environment are overlooked. For example, in MRI in Cambridge a lot of relevant early research has been conducted (if I remember correctly). Perhaps the problem of attention vs consciousness is too specific for the introductory course, but the topic itself is "hot".

Sorry: MRC of course, not MRI (priming from neuroscience has an effect on keyboard handling ;-)).

While this particular subfield is a bit out of my area, one thing I've done with my upper-level courses is trim how much class time I spend on fundamentals (e.g. research methods). For junior/senior level courses, the students often are already familiar with the basic methods and find the material redundant, if not boring. So, I typically reiterate key points (e.g. correlations don't imply causality; dependent vs. independent variables) and otherwise expect the students to review the remaining material on their own. So far, this has worked out quite well. When we get to specific studies we do, however, examine the experimental methods if there are important concepts (e.g. masking and flankers in attention/signal detection research).

I have more experience with attention and agree with what Clarissa and Talis offered. I'd also be sure to include the pop-out effect and attention shifts.

There's a lot of research today pertaining to sustained attention and ego depletion/self-control. Much of it is interesting and could make for some fun classroom demonstrations (e.g. how consuming or tasting something sweet tends to provide a mild boost in self-control and tasks requiring attention), but is not something I'd say that *must* be covered in intro cognition.

I hope some of these ideas help!

Dear colleagues,

We all seem to have forgot some "sexy" topics/demonstrations good for freshmen such as change blindness and inattentional blindness. (And the attentional blink phenomenon is liked not only by researchers, but also by students.)

Thanks everyone for your comments and suggestions - it is always hard to fit everything into a 'survey' course because every topic could be a course by itself! As I get closer I'll post what I came up with.

I think an interesting question for your students (if they are truly interested in the topic) can be: What IS attention alltogehter? As far as I know, there is no all-encopassing answer to that question yet. In that line of thought it might be useful to look at the different methods we use to study attention,e.g. eye tracking, with which I am most familiar with, that serve as an indicator of spatial attention (but not always, see Posner).

One might also ask: When do we need attention, when not? there is e.g.evidence that some kinds of eye movements (smooth pursuit) do not require any ettentional resources, in contrast to most other visual tasks.

My major respects to anyone who teaches this actually quite controversial topic. I have only come to appreciate the complexity of the phenomenon after having been taught the basics in a very simplicstic way.                                                                                                                                                                                        

I think you are right - I usually like to open the topic with W. James' quote "everyone knows what attention is" and H. Pashler's quote "No one knows what attention is"  and ask how can both people be right. I'll look into the eye tracking literature (we just acquired a mobile eye tracking system in my lab). 

Leonard - I wasn't aware of James' quote. That's a fun contrast to Pashler. Thanks for sharing that - I'd love to be able to use these contrasting quotes as an opening in my Intro. Psychology class when we start discussing cognition, since we cover some basic attention ideas there.

Here are the quotes:

“On attention itself, it is needless to discourse at length;

its nature and conditions are familiar to every thoughtful student.”

O. S. Munsell, 1873

“Everybody knows what attention is.”

- William James, 1890

“No one knows what attention is.”

- Harold Pashler, 1998

I really think the James quote should not be taken to imply that the concept of attention isn't worth serious consideration and study. Or that James _really_ believed that everybody knew the definition of attention. Perhaps a more fair paraphrase of the quote would be 'what I am about to discuss will make intuitive sense to the reader'. It's a literary tact that sadly many psychologists take to be a definition or (negative) evaluation of a topic. Far from it... Indeed, the paragraphs just preceding that quote clearly demonstrate James' strong belief of the importance of the concept of attention, both for its own sake and for the sake of its implication for the rest of psychology and the philosophy of mind.

Hi Davood,

You raise an excellent point. I teach Systems and Theories, so I'm familiar with James' original works. If I introduced James' quote I'd also discuss how he was a pragmatic thinker and indeed means to say that attention, like so many things in psychology, is something we all experience and have a "gut sense" of what it is, but defining what is intuitive in a precise way that can be studied becomes challenging. This could then readily lead to all sorts of discussion or an activity that would get students to think about operational definitions and hypotheses, for example. It'd be able to show how these are quite challenging!

Hi Davood and Jay - I agree, the quotes aren't meant to suggest that we don't need to study attention - for me it highlights the difficulty in studying it (in particular defining what it is). I like to use them as a discussion prompt (my next slide is a set of nine "definitions" of attention which are all being used currently - who has the 'right' one, is there a right one?).

So here is my current topic list: History & Methods quick review; Attention; Memory Models, Encoding & Retrieval; Concepts, Categories, Imagery (representation); problem solving and decision making; perception & action; Ecological and Embodied approaches to cognition; language