The Effect of Selective and Divided Attention

Year 11, Investigation 1: by Yeshen Behari

Comparing Auditory Selective and Divided Attention

INTRODUCTION
Why is listening of significant importance in everyday life? Listening is incorporated as an integral
life skill engagement technique, it is important when connecting interpersonally, working in team or
group activities, and dictating notes for subject studies. The formal definition for listening is the
active process by which people make sense to assess and respond to a stimulus through receiving,
understanding, evaluating, remembering, and responding (Hoose, updated 2022). What correlation
does attention have with listening? Attention psychology is a concept that outlines a person’s
concentration and awareness to a particular phenomenon or event, with exclusion to other stimuli,
(McCallum, 2015). It is from these two ideas of listening and attention that the idea that the amount of
information collected is dependent on a person’s state of conscious (a hierarchy ranging from most to
least states of wakefulness) and the capacity of attention we give to certain subjects.
Attention is the ability to focus on a single stimulus or task, whilst ignoring any other background
details. A statement about attention and retained information by (McLeod, updated 2018) explains,
“This limited capacity for paying attention has been conceptualized as a bottleneck, which restricts the
flow of information. The narrower the bottleneck, the lower the rate of flow… Broadbent's and
Treisman's Models of Attention are all bottleneck models because they predict we cannot consciously
attend to all of our sensory input at the same time”. Selective attention is an individual’s ability to
redirect their attention to being totally aware and focused on a specific limited range of stimulus,
whilst concurrently being virtually oblivious to other things going on around us. It is the highest level
of consciousness, where on is completely focused and engaged toward a specific stimulus. Humans
are constantly using selective attention to specific stimuli such as: lining up to kick a goal, studying
for an exam, or changing gears of a car during your first driving lesson (Fletcher and Garton 2017).
Divided attention is the second highest level of attention, commonly known as “multi-tasking”,
occurring at an increase in demand for cognitive processing. When subdividing our attention to two or
more different stimuli, we focus on more than one source. Therefore, we become less aware of one
specific stimulus. An individual uses divided attention when they simultaneously focus on two or
more stimuli, or simultaneously undertakes two or more tasks such as, texting whilst driving . A study
conducted by (Castaneda and Gray 2007) investigated selective and divided attention by comparing
how different types of attention affected the performance of highly skilled and intermediately skilled
baseball players. This study found that baseball players who were highly trained performed better
when they focused on different stimuli in their external surroundings, rather than the execution of
their swing itself. Less skilled baseball players on the other hand, performed of a higher quality when
solely focusing on the execution of their swing, instead of their surroundings. Therefore, (Castaneda
and Gray 2007) concluded that individuals of whom were highly trained and familiar at performing an
action, benefited greatly by dividing their attention, whereas individuals that were unfamiliar at
performing the act, benefited more by selectively attending what they are performing, rather than
focusing on multiple stimulus at once. The aim of the present study was to investigate how selective
and divided attention affects the retention of auditory information by using a dichotic listening
method, requiring the participants to listen and attend to different words presented simultaneously to
each ear. It was hypothesised that Year 11 ATAR Psychology students from Christ Church grammar
School using selective attention, will retain more auditory information as measure by the number of
correct responses on a cognitive questionnaire, compare to Year 11 ATAR Psychology student from
Christ Church Grammar School using divided attention.
The Effect of Selective and Divided Attention

METHOD

Participants
The participants consisted of a sample of 8 students enrolled in Year 11 ATAR Psychology at Christ
Church Grammar School, who ranged from 15-16 years old, all of whom were male participants.
Materials
2 double sided pieces of paper given to the experimenters. Both double sided pieces of paper
differentiated to each other in texts. The one for Experimenter 1 included a side with detailed
instructions on what to do and the other side with a short narrative to read out, along with a qualitative
5-question questionnaire. Experimenter 2’s sheet included one side of detailed instructions outlining
what they needed to do with a table to fill on how many correct responses participant 1 – 8 had gotten.
The other side of the sheet had a short informative text on tooth hygiene, followed by a 5-question
questionnaire. The questionnaires had questions including characters, plot, and comprehensive
information on teeth mentioned in the short text. The Participant receive an information sheet,
providing them with a comprehensive understanding of how to partake in this trial and what will
undergo. Lastly, a metre ruler was utilised to keep the experimenters at equal distance from either side
of the participant.
Procedure
A sample of 20 students studying Psychology was collated through convenience sampling and handed
2 sheets; an information letter briefly informing the student and their parents on what the investigation
involved and their rights to withdraw, and a consent form for the participants and their guardian to
sign. On the day of the experiment, the participants were randomly allocated their role in the
experiment (Experimenter or Participant of Group 1-8) through the process of random allocation. The
technique of random allocation was performed by participants randomly drawing a piece of paper
from a hat with their role written on it. To ensure confidentiality, the participants were given names
such as, E2G4 (Experimenter 2, Group 4). Experimenter 1 read out a brief explanation of the
procedure to both participants of their group. Both experimenters and Participant 1 (Selective
attention) went to a quiet place to perform the experiment, where the experimenters sat 1 metre away
on each side of the participant. Participant 1 was told to listen to just Experimenter 1 while they read
their story in the left ear, and Experimenter 2 read their text into the right ear at the same time. The
participant was asked to answer two qualitative styled questionnaires involving comprehensive
questions based on both experimenter’s texts. The same process was repeated with Participant 2,
instead, the participant was told to listen to both texts (divided attention). All experimenters of groups
1-8 shared their results to collate a table showing an overview of each participant’s performance
(Figure 1).
The Effect of Selective and Divided Attention

RESULTS
After the experiments was conducted, the participants of each group were asked to answer a series of
questions constructed in a qualitative-response styled questionnaire. This is to gain insight on how
much auditory information was retained from the narrative and informative text. The number of
correct answers for each section was added and divided by the amount of trial participants of 4, to
calculate the mean number of questions correct for that section. Moreover, the averages were divided
by the total number of questions correct and multiplied by 100 to find the percentage number of
questions correct answered by the participant.
Figure. 1 ->

Selective Attention Questions correct Questions correct

Trials from experimenter 1 from experimenter 2
(left ear) (right ear)
Participant 1 5 1
Participant 2 5 0 Figure 1 displays the average number of
Participant 3 4 1 correct responses made by each participant
Participant 4 4 0 of each group.
Total Correct (/20) 18/20 2/20
Average Questions 3.6 0.4 The total average number of correct
Correct out of 5
responses in selective attention was 3.6 in
Average Percentage 72% 8%
Correct (%) the left ear, and 0.4 in the right ear. For
divided attention average for left ear was
2.2 and right ear was 1.4 questions correct.
Divided Attention Questions correct Questions correct
Trials from experimenter 1 from experimenter 2 Both results of left ear and right ear in
(left ear) (right ear)
selective attention trials were bimodal from
Participant 5 2 1
the participants, having for left ear 5 and 4
Participant 6 4 3
Participant 7 3 2 questions correct and 1 and 0 questions
Participant 8 2 1 correct for right ear.
Average Questions 2.2 1.4
Correct out of 5
Total Correct (/20) 11/20 7/20
Average Percentage 44% 28%
Correct (%)

Figure. 2 ->

Average number of correct responses

using Selective and Divided attention.
Figure 2 displays the comparison between
80% the mean percentage of correct responses
70% for selective and divided attention in this
60% experiment.
50%
The mean percentage of correct responses
40% for selective attention trials was 72% in the
30% left ear, and 8% in the right unattended ear.
20% For divided attention on the other hand, the
10% mean percentage of correct responses were
44% on the left ear and 28% in the right
0%
Selective attention trials Divided attention trials ear.
Percentage Questions correct from experimenter 1 (left ear)
Percentage Questions correct from experimenter 2 (right ear)
The Effect of Selective and Divided Attention

DISCUSSION
The results of the total number of correct responses and average mean percentages for each condition,
signifies a support of the hypothesis that states selectively attentive individuals retaining a greater
amount of auditory information than divisively attentive individuals based on the participants
responses to the questions. This Reinforces that there is a strong negative relationship between
attention and the number of correct responses overall, as the amount of information that needs to be
retained (attention) increases and the number of correct responses made by each participant decreases.
This is displayed in Figure 1 as the total number of correct questions for selective attention in was
18/20 and 2/20, whereas in divided attention it was 11/20 and 7/20. As the participants in the selective
hearing trials were required to focus and retain information from a singular stimulus, the individuals
amount of information to retain was significantly lower to that of the divided attention trials. These
figures resulted in a higher number of correct responses made in comparison to divisively attentive
individuals. Overall, this emphasises the theory of a negative, inverse relationship between attention
and the amount of correct responses.
Figure 2 represents a comparison between the mean percentages of correct responses made by both
selective and divided attention for both info sets. Although the graph displays that the participants of
divided attention had a higher mean percentage of correct responses on the Right ear, this further
supports the stated hypothesis as the aim of the investigation was to examine which type of attention
retained more information. The observed results are too supported in relation to a previously
conducted research study by Moray (1959), of whom concluded that selective attention was effective
in memorisation however, rendered the individual almost blind to other stimuli. As show in the
present study, the participants were effective in memorising information from the left ear using
selective attention, although they were almost completely oblivious to the other stimulus of rejected
information.
Possible extraneous variables may have affected the results collated in Figure 1 such as, the
participants potentially had: different hearing abilities, a paucity of sleep, or suffrage from memory
difficulties. It was not ensured or considered that these participants had similar mental capabilities and
skills as other participants would. Furthermore, the sample of participants the investigation was
conducted with was not a good reliable as the sample was small of only 8 participants. In future
replication of this experiment, the sample should be considered larger and ensure that the population
is of similar mental capability, skills, and sleep. the ethical procedures undertaken is noted that
student was voluntarily participating, were given parental consent prior to conduction of the
experiment, and were briefed before and after the experiment was conducted.
This present study conducted reveals that selective attention is overall highly effective on the
retention of auditory information compared to divided attention. In conclusion, it is evident that in the
results of this experiment there is a higher mean percentage of correct responses from the participants
from the selective attention group than the divided attention group. Alike to past studies, the results
conclude that whilst selective attention retains more information, it too completely renders individuals
blind of any external stimuli.

REFRENCES

o Arduini-Van Hoose, N. Information Processing Theories | Educational Psychology. Retrieved 3 April 2022, from
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/edpsy/chapter/information-processing-theories/
o Castaneda, B., & Gray, R. (2007). Effects of Focus of Attention on Baseball Batting Performance in Players of Differing Skill Levels.
Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 60–77.
o Fletcher, J., & Garton, A. (2017). Psychology: Self and Others (3rd ed). Nelson.
o McCallum, W. Cheyne (2015, June 9). attention. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/science/attention
o McLeod, S. A. (2018, October 24). Selective attention. Simply Psychology. www.simplypsychology.org/attention-models.html
o Moray, N. (1959). Attention in Dichotic Listening: Affective Cues and the Influence of Instructions. Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 11(1), 56–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470215908416289
The Effect of Selective and Divided Attention