Hostname: page-component-857557d7f7-d5hhr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-12-03T09:59:07.636Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Banishing “Attention” from the study of temporal attention

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 November 2025

Matthew Junker Open the ORCID record for Matthew Junker [Opens in a new window]  and
David Huber
Matthew Junker*
Affiliation:
University of Colorado Boulder , Boulder, CO, USA. matthew.junker@colorado.edu david.huber@colorado.edu
David Huber
Affiliation:
University of Colorado Boulder , Boulder, CO, USA. matthew.junker@colorado.edu david.huber@colorado.edu
*
*Corresponding author.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Attention has been used to explain performance deficits in many visual tasks, even though it lacks a clear definition or distinction from visual perception. We agree with Dr. Rosenholtz that perceptual processes may account for many phenomena previously attributed to spatial attention. We further suggest that perceptual processes may underlie the study of temporal attention, namely the “attentional blink.”

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 48 , 2025 , e144
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Awh, E., Belopolsky, A. V., & Theeuwes, J. (2012). Top-down versus bottom-up attentional control: A failed theoretical dichotomy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(8), 437–443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.06.010 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brehaut, J. C., Enns, J. T., & Di Lollo, V. (1999). Visual masking plays two roles in the attentional blink. Perception & Psychophysics, 61(7), 1436–1448. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206192 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broadbent, D. E., & Broadbent, M. H. P. (1987). From detection to identification: Response to multiple targets in rapid serial visual presentation. Perception & Psychophysics, 42(2), 105–113. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210498 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, X., & Zhou, X. (2015). Revisiting the spread of sparing in the attentional blink. Atten Percept Psychophys, 77, 1596–1607. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-015-0886-5 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cherry, E. C. (1953). Some experiments on the recognition of speech, with one and with two ears. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 25(5), 975–979. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1907229 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Di Lollo, V. (2018). Attention is a sterile concept; iterative reentry is a fertile substitute. Consciousness and cognition, 64, 45–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grandison, T. D., Ghirardelli, T. G., & Egeth, H. E. (1997). Beyond similarity: Masking of the target is sufficient to cause the attentional blink. Perception & Psychophysics, 59(2), 266–274. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211894 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hommel, B., Chapman, C. S., Cisek, P., Neyedli, H. F., Song, J. H., & Welsh, T. N. (2019). No one knows what attention is. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 81, 2288–2303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huber, D. E. (2014). The rise and fall of the recent past: A unified account of immediate repetition paradigms. In Ross, B. (Ed.), Psychology of learning and motivation, 60. (pp. 191–226). PLM, UK: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kanwisher, N. G. (1987). Repetition blindness: Type recognition without token individuation. Cognition, 27(2), 117–143.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335558008248231 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raymond, J. E., Shapiro, K. L., & Arnell, K. M. (1992). Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: An attentional blink? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18(3), 849–860. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.18.3.849 Google Scholar
Rusconi, P., & Huber, D. E. (2018). The perceptual wink model of non-switching attentional blink tasks. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(5), 1717–1739. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1385-6 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tian, X. & Huber, D. E. (2013). Playing ‘duck duck goose’ with neurons: Change detection through connectivity reduction. Psychological Science, 24(6), 819–827.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Treisman, A. (1964). Monitoring and storage of irrelevant messages in selective attention. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 3(6), 449–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(64)80015-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar