Individual differences in attention abilities predict performance in a number of domains. We suggest that two aspects of attention are especially important for variation in attention abilities: intensity and consistency. We review evidence suggesting that individual differences in the amount of attention allocated to a task (intensity) and how consistently attention is allocated to a task (consistency) are related to each other and to overall task performance. We suggest that a number of factors (e.g., capacity, arousal, regulation, motivation) drive variation in intensity and consistency and demonstrate that these two aspects of attention are important in accounting for variation in working memory, learning, and preparatory control. Examining individual differences in both intensity and consistency will be important in order to understand variation in attention abilities in and out of the laboratory.
BanduraA. (1989). Regulation of cognitive processes through perceived self-efficacy. Developmental Psychology, 25(5), 729–735. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.25.5.729
2.
BeattyJ.Lucero-WagonerB. (2000). The pupillary system. In CacioppoJ. T.TassinaryL. G.BerntsonG. G. (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysiology (pp. 142–162). Cambridge University Press.
3.
BraverT. S.GrayJ. R.BurgessG. C. (2007). Explaining the many varieties of working memory variation: Dual mechanisms of cognitive control. In ConwayA. R. A.JarroldC.KaneM. J.MiyakeA.TowseJ. N. (Eds.), Variation in working memory (pp. 76–106). Oxford University Press.
4.
ChevalierN. (2018). Willing to think hard? The subjective value of cognitive effort in children. Child Development, 89(4), 1283–1295. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12805
5.
EngleR. W.KaneM. J. (2004). Executive attention, working memory capacity, and a two-factor theory of cognitive control. In RossB. (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 44, pp. 145–199). Elsevier.
6.
HockeyG. R. J. (2013). Psychology of fatigue: Work, effort, and control. Cambridge University Press.
7.
HutchisonK. A.MoffittC. C.HartK.HoodA. V. B.WatsonJ. M.MarchakF. M. (2020). Measuring task set preparation versus mind wandering using pupillometry. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46(2), 280–295. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000720
8.
JustM. A.CarpenterP. A. (1993). The intensity dimension of thought: Pupillometric indices of sentence processing. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 47(2), 310–339. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0078820
9.
KahnemanD. (1973). Attention and effort. Prentice Hall.
10.
KaneM. J.McVayJ. C. (2012). What mind wandering reveals about executive-control abilities and failures. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(5), 348–354. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0963721412454875
11.
KaneM. J.MeierM. E.SmeekensB. A.GrossG. M.ChunC. A.SilviaP. J.KwapilT. R. (2016). Individual differences in the executive control of attention, memory, and thought, and their associations with schizotypy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145(8), 1017–1048. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000184
12.
KanferR.AckermanP. L. (1989). Motivation and cognitive abilities: An integrative/aptitude-treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(4), 657–690. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.74.4.657
13.
KeulersE. H. H.JonkmanL. M. (2019). Mind wandering in children: Examining task-unrelated thoughts in computerized tasks and a classroom lesson, and the association with different executive functions. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 179, 276–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2018.11.013
14.
KlingerE. (1999). Thought flow: Properties and mechanisms underlying shifts in content. In SingerJ. A.SaloveyP. (Eds.), At play in the fields of consciousness: Essays in honor of Jerome L. Singer (pp. 29–50). Erlbaum.
15.
LockeE. A.LathamG. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Prentice Hall.
16.
MatthewsG.Reinerman-JonesL. E. (2017). Workload assessment: How to diagnose workload issues and enhance performance. Human Factors & Ergonomics Society.
17.
MillerA. L.GrossM. P.UnsworthN. (2019). Individual differences in working memory capacity and long-term memory: The influence of intensity of attention to items at encoding as measured by pupil dilation. Journal of Memory and Language, 104, 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.09.005
18.
MillerA. L.UnsworthN. (2020). Variation in attention at encoding: Insights from pupillometry and eye gaze fixations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46(12), 2277–2294. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000797
19.
MillerA. L.UnsworthN. (2021). Attending to encode: The role of consistency and intensity of attention in learning ability [Manuscript submitted for publication]. Department of Psychology, University of Oregon.
20.
MiyakeA.FriedmanN. P.EmersonM. J.WitzkiA. H.HowerterA.WagerT. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 49–100. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734
21.
PaasF.van MerriënboerJ. J. G. (2020). Cognitive-load theory: Methods to manage working memory load in the learning of complex tasks. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(4), 394–398. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0963721420922183
22.
RobisonM. K.MillerA. L.UnsworthN. (2020). A multi-faceted approach to understanding individual differences in mind wandering. Cognition, 198, Article 104078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104078
23.
ShenhavA.MusslickS.LiederF.KoolW.GriffithsT. L.CohenJ. D.BotvinickM. M. (2017). Toward a rational and mechanistic account of mental effort. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 40, 99–124. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-neuro-072116-031526
24.
SmallwoodJ.SchoolerJ. W. (2015). The science of mind wandering: Empirically navigating the stream of consciousness. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 487–518.
25.
UnsworthN. (2015). Consistency of attentional control as an important cognitive trait: A latent variable analysis. Intelligence, 49, 110–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.01.005
26.
UnsworthN.McMillanB. D. (2014a). Fluctuations in pre-trial attentional state and their influence on goal neglect. Consciousness and Cognition, 26, 90–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2014.03.003
27.
UnsworthN.McMillanB. D. (2014b). Trial-to-trial fluctuations in attentional state and their relation to intelligence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40(3), 882–891. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035544
28.
UnsworthN.McMillanB. D. (2017). Attentional disengagements in educational contexts: A diary investigation of everyday mind-wandering and distraction. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2, Article 32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-017-0070-7
29.
UnsworthN.MillerA. L.RobisonM. K. (2020). Individual differences in lapses of sustained attention: Ocolumetric indicators of intrinsic alertness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 46(6), 569–592. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000734
30.
UnsworthN.RobisonM. K. (2015). Individual differences in the allocation of attention to items in working memory: Evidence from pupillometry. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(3), 757–765. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0747-6
31.
UnsworthN.RobisonM. K. (2017a). The importance of arousal for variation in working memory capacity and attention control: A latent variable pupillometry study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43(12), 1962–1987. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000421
32.
UnsworthN.RobisonM. K. (2017b). A locus coeruleus-norepinephrine account of individual differences in working memory capacity and attention control. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(4), 1282–1311. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1220-5
33.
UnsworthN.RobisonM. K. (2020). Working memory capacity and sustained attention: A cognitive-energetic perspective. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46(1), 77–103. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000712
34.
UnsworthN.RobisonM. K.MillerA. L. (2020). Individual differences in lapses of attention: A latent variable analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000998
35.
van ZomerenA. H.BrouwerW. H. (1994). Clinical neuropsychology of attention. Oxford University Press
