1

SPAN OF ATTENTION

Tanya Kim Mehra, A015116721023

BA+MA (Clinical Psychology) – Integrated, Amity Institute of Psychology & Applied

Sciences, Amity University Noida

PSYC153: Basic of Psychological Processes

Professor Dr Mohammad Imran

December 21, 2021

 2

Span of Attention

Aim

To measure the span of attention of the participants with the means of meaningful and

non-meaningful words.

Introduction

Attention is a state in which cognitive resources are focused on certain aspects of the

environment rather than on others and the central nervous system (CNS) is in a state of

readiness to respond to stimuli. While talking about attention we think of it as, ‘the

concentration of awareness on some phenomenon to exclusion of other stimuli. Edward

Bradford Titchener said that attention determined the content of consciousness and

influenced the quality of conscious experience. But as time went by, less emphasis was put

on the subjective element of consciousness and more on the behaviour patterns by which

attention could be recognized in others. Attention is connected to the immediate experience

of the individual; it is a state of current awareness.

Many theories regarding attention have been criticized for dealing with just the

inactive part of attention – positively there is more to attention than simple selection. The

nature of this selectivity is one of the principal points of disagreement between the extant

theories of attention. Some of the most influential theories treat the selectivity of attention

resulting from limitations in the brain’s capacity to consciously entertain multiple perceivable

stimuli. The other theories take the selectivity of attention to be the result of limitations in the

thinking subject’s ability to consciously engage in various lines of thought. A third group

endeavour to account for attention’s selectivity in ways that need not make any reference to

limitations in capacity.

There are five types of attention; they are analytical attention, habitual attention,

ideational attention, involuntary attention, and voluntary attention. Analytical attention,

 3

when our attention is diverted towards the analysis of a problem and to find out the

prospective for that occurring presently. Habitual attention, it is a type of attention which is

determined by habits. Example: a school worker will be automatically diverting their

attention towards the school they are working in, even if they are just passing by. Ideational

attention, it is a type of attention where the attention is diverted towards some image, or

status, or structure selected to object. Involuntary attention is when our attention is diverted

suddenly toward the stimulus, it hinders the process of goal seeking sometimes but not

always. Example: as someone is watching TV, and there is a loud crashing noise outside their

attention will be drawn to it. Voluntary attention, in it when our attention is diverted willingly

to an object. Example: while sitting in a classroom, students divert their attention towards the

lecture even if it is not understandable.

Determinants of attention are of two kinds external and internal. External

determinants of span of attention are nature of stimulus, intensity of stimulus, repetition of

stimulus, movement of stimulus, isolation of stimulus, duration of stimulus, change of

stimulus, contrast of stimulus and location of stimulus. Meanwhile the internal determinants

of span of attention are interest, basic drive, mental set, aim, meaning, habit, disposition and

temperament, experience, emotion and social motives.

Let us now investigate some theories regarding attention. Firstly, Broadbent’s theory,

he proposed that physical characteristics of messages are used to select one message for

further processing and that all others are lost. Information from all the stimuli presented at

any given time enters an unlimited capacity sensory buffer. One of the inputs is then selected

on the basis of its physical characteristics for further processing by being allowed to pass

through a filter. Because we have only a limited capacity to process information, this filter is

designed to prevent the information-processing system from becoming overloaded. The

inputs not initially selected by the filter remain briefly in the sensory buffer store, and if they
 4

are not processed, they decay rapidly. Broadbent assumed that the filter rejected the

unattended message at an early stage of processing. According to Broadbent the meaning of

any of the messages is not considered at all by the filter. All semantic processing is carried

out after the filter has selected the message to pay attention to. So whichever message(s)

restricted by the bottleneck (i.e., not selective) is not understood. Broadbent wanted to see

how people were able to focus their attention (selectively attend), and to do this he

deliberately overloaded them with stimuli. Now let us move on to Attenuation theory. This

theory was proposed by Treisman (1964) agreed with Broadbent’s theory of any early

bottleneck filter. But the difference is that Treisman’s filter attenuates rather than eliminates

the unattended material. This means that people can still process the meaning of the attended

messages. This theory is also called, Treisman’s Attenuation Model. Treisman’s Model

overcomes some of the problems associated with Broadbent’s Filter Model. Treisman’s

model does not explain how exactly semantic analysis works. The nature of the attention

process has never been precisely specified. A problem with all dichotic listening experiments

is that one can never be sure that the participants have not actually switched attention to the

so-called unattended channel.

The term “span of attention” refers to the numbers of object which can be grasped in

one short presentation. Sir William Hamilton (1959) was the first to carry experimental study

in this field. Later on, serial studies were carried on revealing significant facts. Dallerback

(1929) studied the span of attention for dots, words, figures, and colours of found them to be

8,8,7,9, 3.9 and 3.0 respectively. Attention is defined as the process which compels the

individuals to select some stimulus according to his interest and attitude out of the

multiplicity of stimuli present in the Environment. Thus, in short it is the selective activity of

consciousness as a process of getting an object of thought clearly before the mind. Span of

attention tells us that how many things can exist in the focus of consciousness at one time in
 5

an individual. The span of Visual apprehension is observed through the instruments named

Tachistoscope. Tachistoscope is an apparatus designed to expose objects for a brief space of

time. A subject is given a momentary glance from 1/5th to 1/10th of a second on regular or

irregular groups of dots or letter and is required to tell how many he had observed. This

instrument was manufactured by Hamilton and was first used by Whipple.

There are four types of tachistoscope, they are: Tall Tachistoscope, Rotatory Tachistoscope,

Pendulum Tachistoscope, and Camera Tachistoscope.

During the experiment meaningful and non-meaningful words will be used to

determine the span of attention. Meaningful words are those words which are nothing but the

constitution of one or more than one letter of English alphabet which provide complete

meaning. The words refer to these words which are written on the card and used in

tachistoscope. Non-meaningful words are those words which are nothing but the constitution

of one or more than one letter of English alphabet which does not provide any meaning. The

words refer to these words which are written on the card and used in tachistoscope.

Review of Literature

Oyama, T., Kikuchi, T., & Ichihara, S. (1981). Span of attention, backward masking, and

reaction time. Perception & Psychophysics, 29(2), 106–112. In this literature the author

performed a test pattern consisting of 0 to 15 dots and a following random dot masking

pattern were presented for 5 msec each with SOAs varying between 30 and 200 msec. The

subject was asked to report the perceived number of dots in the test pattern as soon as

possible and to assign a confidence rating to each report. The span of attention (upper limit

for 50% correct numerosity judgments) increased from 2.4 to 9.5 as the SOA increased.

Backward masking reduced the reported number of dots from the actual number in the test

pattern, especially with small SOAs. Reaction time increased linearly at a low rate

(approximately 40 msec/dot) up to 4 dots in the test pattern and then increased linearly at a
 6

high rate (approximately 370 msec/dot) as the reported, or perceived, number of dots

increased. The two different branches of the reaction time curve were considered to represent

two separate processes, subitizing and counting, as suggested by Klahr (1973), who found

similar dual increase rates as a function of the actual number of dots. These findings, as well

as causal inference based on partial correlations and path analysis, indicated that the reported

(perceived) number of dots and confidence rating were both determined by the number of

stimulus dots and the SOA, and that the reaction time was determined by the so-determined

perceived number of dots and level of confidence. A multistage model is proposed.

Bandiera, O., Prat, A., Sadun, R., & Wulf, J. (2014). Span of Control and Span of

Attention. SSRN Electronic Journal. In this literature, with using novel data on CEO time

use, we document the relationship between the size and composition of the executive team

and the attention of the CEO. We combine information about CEO span of control for a

sample of 65 companies with detailed data on how CEOs allocate their time, which we define

as their span of attention. CEOs with larger executive teams do not save time for personal

use, or to cultivate external constituencies. Instead, CEOs with broader spans of control

invest more in a “team” model of interaction. They spend more time internally, specifically in

pre-planned meetings that have more participants from different functions. The

complementarity between span of control and the team model of interaction is more prevalent

in larger firms. span of control complemented by span of attention will allow us to explore

the relationship between organizational structure, management interactions, firm strategy, and

performance.

Bradbury, N. A. (2016). Attention span during lectures: 8 seconds, 10 minutes, or

more? Advances in Physiology Education, 40(4), 509–513. The author says that, in the

current climate of curriculum reform, the traditional lecture has come under fire for its

perceived lack of effectiveness. Indeed, several institutions have reduced their lectures to 15
 7

min in length based upon the “common knowledge” and “consensus” that there is a decline in

students’ attention 10–15 min into lectures. A review of the literature on this topic reveals

many discussions referring to prior studies but scant few primary investigations. Alarmingly,

the most often cited source for a rapid decline in student attention during a lecture barely

discusses student attention at all. Of the studies that do attempt to measure attention, many

suffer from methodological flaws and subjectivity in data collection. Thus, the available

primary data do not support the concept of a 10- to 15-min attention limit. Interestingly, the

most consistent finding from a literature review is that the greatest variability in student

attention arises from differences between teachers and not from the teaching format itself.

Certainly, even the most interesting material can be presented in a dull and dry fashion, and it

is the job of the instructor to enhance their teaching skills to provide not only rich content but

also a satisfying lecture experience for the students.

Hypothesis

The span of attention for meaningful words is more than that of non-meaningful

words.

Method

Participant Preliminaries

Name- Avy Vung

Gender- Female

Age- 20

Educational Qualification- BA LLB

Health- Physically and mentally healthy

Design

Material Required
 8

Apparatus: tachistoscope, flashcards of meaningful words, flashcards of non-

meaningful words, plain sheets, pen/pencil, and graph sheet.

Variables

Independent variable- Cards of meaningful and non-meaningful words

Dependent variable- Subject’s response in different trials

Rapport Formation

The participant was made to sit comfortably. The participant was engaged in an

informal conversation to make them feel relaxed. Once it was ensured that they are

comfortable, the experiment was introduced. The instructions for the experiment were given

to the participant. The participant was assured that their results would be kept confidential

and not shared with anyone. If the participant had any query, it was addressed, and the

procedure was started.

Administration

Controls

The environment was peaceful and appropriate for the experimentation. The distance

between the subject and the screen was maintained about one foot. In each attempt the card

was shown only once. After the completion of showing meaningful words, 5 minutes rest was

given to the subject.

Precautions

It was made sure that the tachistoscope was placed at equivalent distance between the

experimenter and the subject. The flashcards were made of proper size. The experimenter

moved the board up from behind before placing the flashcard in it. It was made sure about the

room being kept undisturbed during the experiment. It was also made sure that the room was

properly lit.

Instructions
 9

The subject was informed that the word will be only shown once. And that they must

write down the word they saw. They were informed that after each trial they will get a five-

minute break. And were informed to get prepared when the experimenter told them.

Procedure

Adjust the tachistoscope so that it gives exposure of about 1/10 of a second. Let the

subject be seated comfortably in front of the tachistoscope. Make sure that the exposed

material is clearly visible. Then instruct him as follows:

“When I say ready, you will look attentively in the centre of this fixation board (point out).

Here, a card containing unrelated letters and small words will appear one at a time for

fraction of 1/10 of a second. You must see the content on the card closely and just after the

exposure you must write this on response sheet (place answer sheet before him) whatever you

have seen. Reproduced material should be in the same order as presented. Several cards will

be shown to you one by one. Each time you try to do your best.”

Now present one card at time. Cards are to be placed behind the tachistoscope so that they are

not visible to the subject beforehand. Uplift the shutter of the tachistoscope and place the

appropriate card on the card holder. Before each presentation, give ready signal. After 2

seconds, expose the card placed in the tachistoscope. After each exposure, allow sufficient

time to write the presented material. Meanwhile, change the card for the next trial. Between

two trials, allow one minute time interval to control the factor of eye strain.

Introspective Report

“I enjoyed the experiment. I had thought it would be a very easy experiment and I

would be able to do it without much effort, but it was harder than I had thought. Most the

words were so hard to remember, but that made it even more fun to do.”

Observational Report
 10

The subject seemed to be calm and collect before the start of the experiment and was

confident. The subject was doing well during the meaningful words’ trials but during the non-

meaningful they had asked if the words could be displayed a little bit longer.

Results and Discussion

Table 1: This table shows the span of attention for meaningful words

S.no. Meaningful Word repeated Result Percentage

words

1. Go Go Correct

2. We We Correct

3. You You Correct

4. See See Correct

5. Cat Cat Correct

6. Love Love Correct

7. Good Good Correct

8. Water Winter Wrong

9. Money Money Correct 90%

10. Apple Apple Correct

11. Centre Centre Correct

12. Nation Notion Wrong

13. Palace Palace Correct

14. Arrange Arrange Correct

15. Request Request Correct

 11

16. Picture Picture Correct

17. Building Building Correct

18. Research Research Correct

19. Kindness Kindness Correct

20. Beautiful Beautiful Correct

Table 2: This table shows the span of attention for non-meaningful words.

S.no. Meaningful Word repeated Result Percentage

words

1. SK SK Correct

2. KN KN Correct

3. QTB QTB Correct

4. CFJ CFJ Correct

5. DERM DERM Correct

6. KQWC KOWC Wrong 41.7%

7. DMSY DMZY Wrong

8. MCFHJ MCFHT Wrong

9. ZHNOF ZHNOI Wrong

10. CDMZH CDMM Wrong

11. BLSZMKP BLZZMP Wrong

12. DNVFNT DNVNT Wrong

 12

Calculation

A.

1. Percentage of meaningful words:

Words shown – words correctly repeated X 100

Words shown

= 20 – 18 X 100 / 20

= 200/20

= 10

2. Span of attention in meaningful words:

= 100 – 10

= 90

B.

1. Percentage of non-meaningful words:

Words shown – words correctly repeated X 100

Words shown

= 12 – 5 X 100 / 12

= 700 / 12

= 58.3

2. Span of non-meaningful words:

= 100 – 58.3

= 41.7

The aim of the experiment was to measure the span of attention of the subject with the

means of meaningful and non-meaningful words. The subject was able to precisely read
 13

every one of the four-letter sets of non-meaningful word when the card containing three- or

four-letter set were displayed of non-meaningful word, the response was correct. Be that as it

may, when the card containing five non-meaningful syllables were shown all the response

were wrong thus the outcome for five non-significant syllables was zero. When the card of

meaningful words were shown the subject responded to all the words was shown. The subject

responded to all the cards except two words being wrong.

As the meaningful words table scored 90% meanwhile the non-meaningful was only able to

reach 41.7%. The shorter non-meaningful words were easier to remember than that of five

alphabet non-meaningful words.

Conclusion

The experiment was successful, and the hypothesis was proven true. As shown in the result

table, meaningful words have less errors when compared to that of non-meaningful words

errors.

References

Attention | psychology. (n.d.). Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 27 December 2021, from

https://www.britannica.com/science/attention

APA Dictionary of Psychology. (n.d.). APA Dictionary of Psychology. Retrieved 24

December 2021, from https://dictionary.apa.org/attention

Oyama, T., Kikuchi, T., & Ichihara, S. (1981). Span of attention, backward masking, and

reaction time. Perception & Psychophysics, 29(2), 106–112.

https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03207273

Bandiera, O., Prat, A., Sadun, R., & Wulf, J. (2014). Span of Control and Span of Attention.

SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2392623

 14

Bradbury, N. A. (2016). Attention span during lectures: 8 seconds, 10 minutes, or more?

Advances in Physiology Education, 40(4), 509–513.

https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00109.2016

Attention Span. (2016, February 18). GoodTherapy.Org Therapy Blog.

https://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/psychpedia/attention-span