EXPERIMENT 6

DIVISION OF ATTENTION

ABSTRACT

Attention is the behavioural and cognitive process of selectively concentration on a discrete

aspect of information, whether considered subjective or objective, while ignoring other
perceivable information. Attention in psychology, the concentration of awareness on some
phenomenon to the exclusion of other stimuli. In simpler words attention is the behaviour a
person uses to focus the senses, from sight to hearing and even smell. Whereas, division of
attention is the simultaneous allocation of attentional resources to two (or more) tasks. The
division may cross modalities, as when speaking on a mobile phone or while driving a
vehicle. Since humans were not thought to have an infinite capacity to process everything,
focusing on one thing at the expense of the other, much of the research in this area has
focused on what factors influence attention. It has been devoted to identifying which and
understanding which neural mechanisms are what. Involved in selective information
processing (Attention, 2007) This particular experiment was conducted to understand the
relationship between independent and dependent variables - to find different types of
attention by cognition measures. Three different states were administered for data collection
purposes: (1) visual condition, (2) visual and audio words condition, and (3) visual and
number condition. The results of this study show that older people are more alert than
younger people.

Keywords: Attention, Sustained Attention, Divided Attention, Selective Attention, Recognition

Problem Statement
Relationship between independent and dependent variable- to find out different types of
attention by measuring through recognition
INTRODUCTION

Attention is the behavioural and cognitive process of selectively concentration on a discrete

aspect of information, whether considered subjective or objective, while ignoring other
perceivable information (Attention). Attention in psychology, the concentration of awareness
on some phenomenon to the exclusion of other stimuli. In simpler words attention is the
behaviour a person uses to focus the senses, from sight to hearing and even smell. Whereas,
division of attention is the simultaneous allocation of attention resources to two (or more)
tasks.

Prior to the establishment of psychology as a scientific field, attention was studied in the field
of philosophy. A great many discoveries in the field of attention have been made by
philosophers. Psychologist John B. Watson calls Juan Luis Vives the father of modern
psychology. He was the first to recognize the importance of empirical inquiry in his book De
Anima et Vita (Soul and Life), in his research on memory, Vives found that the more we paid
attention to a stimulus, the better it was stored.

Early psychologists such as Edward Bradford Tichener, attention determined the content of
consciousness and influenced the quality of conscious experience. In the years that followed,
less emphasis was placed on the subjective component of consciousness, and more on
behavioral patterns that discern the attention of others. Human experience is determined by
the way people direct their attention, and it is clear that we cannot completely control this
direction. For example, it can be difficult to focus your attention on a task, conversation, or
sequence of events. A person's attention may also be "caught" by an unexpected event rather
than spontaneously directed to it.

Psychologists began studying attention in the late 19th century. Prior to this, philosophers
usually viewed attention in the context of perception, the mechanism by which new ideas
become associated with existing ideas. Thus, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz suggests that the loss
of consciousness to the constant sound of a waterfall indicates that the event cannot be
perceived (i.e., represented in consciousness) without special attention. He suggested that
attention determines what is perceived and what is not. The term perception was also used in
his 19th century by Wilhelm Wundt, one of the founders of modern psychology. But Wundt
was one of the first to point out the difference between focal and more general features of
human consciousness. He wrote of a broader field of consciousness (which he called the field
of view) in which there is a more limited focus of attention (perspective). He suggested that
the spotlight scope would be about six articles or groups. He also speculated that attention is
a function of the brain's frontal lobe.

In 1906, another eminent psychologist, W.B. Pillsbury, proposed three methods of measuring
attention. The first relied on tests that measure attention by performing tasks deemed to
require high levels of attention. The second measured attentional deficits by declining
performance. The third measured attentional intensity by the level of stimulus required to
distract the subject.

This particular experiment was then undertaken to understand the relationship between
independent and dependent variable- to find out different types of attention by measurement
through recognition. 3 distinct conditions – namely (1) Visual Condition (2) Visual and
Audio Words Condition (3) Visual and Number Condition were administered for the purpose
of data collection.

Review of literature

1. Wilhelm Wundt introduced the study of attention to the field of psychology. He

measured mental processing speed by likening it to differences in stargazing
measurements. Astronomers in this time would measure the time it took for stars to
travel. Among these measurements when astronomers recorded the times, there were
personal differences in calculation. These different readings resulted in different
reports from each astronomer. To correct for this, a personal equation was developed.
Wundt applied this to mental processing speed. Wundt realized that the time it takes
 to see the stimulus of the star and write down the time was being called an
"observation error" but actually was the time it takes to switch voluntarily one's
attention from one stimulus to another. 
2. The Deese/Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm comprises the study of lists in
which words (e.g., bed, pillow, etc.) are all associates of a single non studied critical
item (e.g., sleep). The probability of falsely recalling or recognising non studied
critical items is often similar to (or sometimes higher than) the probability of correctly
recalling or recognising studied associates. False memories produced throughout this
paradigm are usually seen as vivid, long lasting, and difficult to consciously avoid.
Our experiment aimed to analyse the effect of dichotic listening and shadowing
procedures on the production of false memories in the DRM paradigm. The results
showed that the production of false memories under a divided attention condition
during processing was not eliminated, independently of the type of memory task –
recall or recognition. Moreover, the proportion of false memories produced in our
study was similar to the amounts of correct recall and recognition in both encoding
conditions. Therefore, our study confirms the robustness of this type of memory
distortion (e.g., Gallo, Roediger, & McDermott, 2001), because even when the
encoding conditions are impoverished, participants are prone to falsely remember the
critical words, reinforcing the theoretical assumption of the automatic activation of
critical lures.
3. A study conducted by Timothy A. Salthouse, Janice Davenport Rogan &  Kenneth
A. Prill (1984) -Young and old adults were compared in their efficiency of
remembering concurrently presented series of letters and digits in three separate
experiments. Instructions and payoffs to vary attentional emphasis across the two
types of material in different conditions allowed the examination of attention-
operating characteristics in the two age groups. Strategy-independent measures
derived from these attention-operating characteristics revealed that older adults
exhibited greater performance deficits than young adults when dividing their
attention between the two tasks, even though dual-task difficulty was individually
adjusted for each subject. It was concluded that either the total amount of
attention available for distribution or the efficiency of its allocation decreased
with age even though the ability to vary one’s attention between concurrent tasks
in response to instructions and payoffs remained intact.
4. The intrusion of internet-enabled electronic devices (laptop, tablet, and cell phone)
has transformed the modern college lecture into a divided attention task. This study
measured the effect of using an electronic device for a non-academic purpose during
class on subsequent exam performance. In a two-section college course, electronic
devices were permitted in half the lectures, so the effect of the devices was assessed in
a within-student, within-item counterbalanced experimental design. Dividing attention
between an electronic device and the classroom lecture did not reduce comprehension
of the lecture, as measured by within-class quiz questions. Instead, divided attention
reduced long-term retention of the classroom lecture, which impaired subsequent unit
exam and final exam performance. Students self-reported whether they had used an
electronic device in each class. Exam performance was significantly worse than the
 no-device control condition both for students who did and did not use electronic
devices during that class. (Arnold L. Glass & Mengxue Kang, (2017).
5. Most studies of divided attention (DA) and memory have focused on encoding rather
than retrieval, and those studies show clearly that DA affects many kinds of memory.
Specifically, using a procedure in which participants perform a distracting or
secondary task simultaneously while encoding new information, researchers have
shown that performance on explicit memory tests of recall or recognition is sharply
reduced compared to a FA condition in which attention is not diverted at encoding. In
these studies, virtually any distracting task has a negative effect on memory
(Murdock, 1965; Baddeley et al., 1984; Fisk and Schneider, 1984; Craik et al., 1996;
Anderson et al., 1998; Naveh-Benjamin et al., 1998, 2000; see Mulligan, 2008, for a
review).
6. Under some conditions, retrieval-phase DA effects on explicit memory can be
substantial (Jacoby, 1991; Hicks and Marsh, 2000; Lozito and Mulligan, 2006). One
crucial factor appears to be whether the distracting task and the memory task use
similar materials. In a series of studies, Fernandes and Moscovitch (2000, 2002, 2003;
Skinner and Fernandes, 2008) found that distracting tasks whose materials
mismatched (e.g., digits) the to-be-remembered material (e.g., words) had little impact
on recall performance, but distracting tasks whose materials matched the to-be-
remembered material (i.e., both memory and distracting tasks used word stimuli) had
considerable negative effects on recall. This material-specific DA effect suggests that
explicit memory retrieval is most affected when other concurrent tasks compete for
information in a common representational system (Fernandes and Moscovitch, 2000).
7. Very little is known how DA affects implicit memory at the time of retrieval, and only
a handful of studies have systematically investigated this issue (Clarke and Butler,
2008; Lozito and Mulligan, 2010). These studies have generally provided good
support for the automatic retrieval hypothesis as applied to implicit memory.
8. Clarke and Butler (2008) found that a syllable monitoring distracting task had no
effect on word-stem completion priming, in which words are studied and participants
respond to word stems (e.g., sta___) with the first word that comes to mind. However,
the same distracting task had a significant negative effect on the matched explicit test
of cued recall.1 Lozito and Mulligan (2010) used a variety of distracting tasks and
multiple implicit memory tasks such as perceptual identification, word-stem
completion, and category exemplar generation (CEG) to investigate retrieval-phase
DA effects on implicit memory. Priming was unaffected in every case, regardless of
whether distracting tasks required frequent or occasional responses (which can
sometimes determine whether encoding-phase DA effects occur for implicit memory;
see Mulligan, 2003; Mulligan et al., 2007), and regardless of whether distracting task
materials overlapped with the implicit memory tasks.
9. Together, these studies provide good support for the automaticity hypothesis, and they
join additional studies that have reported little or no effect of retrieval-phase DA on
other automatic uses of memory such as artificial grammar learning, false fame, or
estimates of familiarity in recognition (Jacoby et al., 1989; Jacoby, 1991; Helman and
Berry, 2003).
 METHOD

Objective
i) Determining division of attention by recognition.

Hypothesis 
i. older individuals will have better percentages of correct responses of Focused-
Attention in comparison to relatively younger individuals
ii. older individuals will have better percentages of correct responses of Divided-
Attention in comparison to relatively younger individuals.
iii. Older individuals will have better percentages of correct responses of Selective-
Attention in comparison to relatively younger individuals

Experimental Design
A within-the-group counter balancing experimental design was used in this experiment.
Counter balancing is a technique that allows researchers to control the effects of confounding
variables in plans in which the same participant is repeatedly exposed to a condition,
treatment, or stimulus.

Since our goal indicates that the same participants should be measured under different
conditions, with different treatments, by comparison between subjects, a within-group
counter balancing experimental design is the appropriate solution. .

1. Material:
1. Laptop
2. The attachment of the PowerPoint presentation files containing 3 distinct conditions
3. A wireless mouse
4. Informed consent forms
5. A plain sheet 
6. A pen
7. Stopwatch
8. Response Sheet

2. Variables
A. Independent Variable:
1. Attention

B. Dependent Variable:
 1. Recognition of the attention of the subject
2. Effects of division of attention on recognition

C. Control Variable  
1. No feedback
2. Total number of conditions should not be disclosed to the subject
3. Environmental factors – noise, light and fan are controlled.
4. Brightness of the device should be constant across all subjects
5. The brightness of the device should not change throughout the experiment.
6. Audio volume output should be constant across all subjects.
7. The audio volume output of the device shall not change throughout the experiment.
8. The subject’s mobile should be on silent.
9. Subject and experimenter should not be using any electronic gadgets other than the
one in materials.

4. Sample
Subject 1: A 21 yr. old individual was taken as a subject for this experiment.
Subject 2: A 20 yr. old individual was taken as a subject for this experiment.

5. Scoring Method
Attention Value under all three conditions will be obtained in percentages by the following
formula:

Attention Value 
= (Number of words correctly recognised * 100) / Total number of words presented

PROCEDURE
1. Rapport Formation:
Subject 1:
Subject 2:
2. Instructions for the Subject
 Condition 1

1. Get prepared when ready signal is given

2. As soon as the experimenter says yes, turn your attention to a screen on which some
words appear.

3. Do your best to memorize the words presented to you

 4. You will receive an answer sheet at the end of the presentation, so please complete it
as soon as possible. The sheet has a list of words with two columns: (1) Seen and (2)
New.
You are required to go through the list and assess whether the words in front of you were
included in the presentation or not.

 If it was included  :  Put a “tick mark” against “Seen”

 If it wasn’t included :  Put a “tick mark” against “New”

5. Hand your sheet over to the experimenter upon completion.

 Condition 2

1. Get prepared when ready signal is given

2. As soon as the experimenter says “yes” focus your attention on the screen on which you
will see some words along with an audio clip of words - simultaneously.

3. Do the best of your abilities to remember both – audio and visual words

4. Upon the end of the presentation, you will be provided with a response sheet that you are
required to fill as fast as possible for you. There is a list of words on the sheet along with 4
columns – (1) Seen (2) New (3) Audio and (4) Visual.

You are required to go through the list and assess whether the words in front of you were
included in the presentation or not – and if yes, then was the presentation auditorily or
visually.
 If it was included  :  Put a “tick mark” against “Seen”
 If it wasn’t included :  Put a “tick mark” against “New”

 If it was Seen Auditorily :  Put a “tick mark” against “Audio”

 If it was Seen Visually :  Put a “tick mark” against “Visual”

5. Hand your sheet over to the experimenter upon completion.

 Condition 3

1. Get prepared when ready signal is given

2. As soon as the experimenter says “yes” focus your attention on the screen on which you
will see some words along with an audio clip of numbers - simultaneously.

3. Do the best of your abilities to remember the visually presented words and make a mental
note of the total number of odd numbers auditorily presented.
4. Upon the end of the presentation, you will be provided with a response sheet that you are
required to fill as fast as possible for you. There is a list of words on the sheet along with 4
columns – (1) Seen (2) New (3) Audio and (4) Visual.

You are required to go through the list and assess whether the words in front of you were
included in the presentation or not – and if yes, then was the presentation auditorily or
visually.
 If it was included  :  Put a “tick mark” against “Seen”
 If it wasn’t included :  Put a “tick mark” against “New”

 If it was Seen Auditorily :  Put a “tick mark” against “Audio”

 If it was Seen Visually :  Put a “tick mark” against “Visual”

You are also required to mention the total number of odd numbers you were presented with
auditorily, to the best of your abilities.

5. Hand your sheet over to the experimenter upon completion

3. Actual Procedure 
Experiments were conducted in a secluded room to ensure there were no distractions.
Subjects were welcomed and greeted in an appropriately lit room. After familiarization, the
subject was presented with an instruction sheet for one condition and asked to read each step
and repeat it to confirm correct understanding and leave no room for error.
They were then requested to take a seat in front of the laptop, which was positioned at a
definite distance, as to maintain equidistance between subjects and screen in all trials.

With proper positioning and a thorough understanding of what the experiment is and what
work is required, the topic began.

The presentation ran smoothly and the subject was presented with an answer sheet and filled
it out.

After completing one condition, they were given a two-minute rest before starting the next
condition.

The upcoming condition was then executed in the same way as the first condition.
Presentation of instructions, questioning session, proper placement of subjects, control of
conditions, collection of answer sheets, an inclusion of 2-minute breaks between each
condition.
Upon completion of all conditions, subjects were presented with a introspective sheet to write
down their experiences of the experiment, which were systematically collected. Subject
thanked for participation.

RESULTS
Subject 1:
Qualitative result

Quantitative result
Trial 1:
Condition 1: visual condition
Sr. No. Words Seen New Visual Auditory
1 Diary Yes Yes
2 Bottle Yes
3 Bucket Yes
4 Iron Yes Yes
5 Speaker Yes
6 Packet Yes Yes
7 Grinder Yes
8 Sweater Yes Yes
9 Bag Yes Yes
10 Broom Yes
11 Paper Yes Yes
12 Chair Yes
13 Battery Yes
14 Chewing Yes Yes
gum
15 Tissue
16 Shampoo Yes Yes
17 A/C
18 Pillow
19 Punching
machine
20 Glasses
21 Plate
22 Type writer
23 Grains
24 Socks
25 Watch
26 Camera
27 Stamp Yes Yes
28 I-pad Yes Yes
29 Postcard Yes Yes
30 charger
Table1.1. Response Sheet of Subject 1 – Trial 1 | Condition 1
 Attentional Value
 = (Number of words correctly recognised * 100) / Total number of words presented
= (11 * 100) / 10
= 110% 

Trial 2:
Condition 2: Visual and Audio Words Condition
Sr. No. Words Seen New Visual Auditory
1 Bake Yes Yes
2 Jump Yes Yes
3 Tree
4 Game Yes Yes
5 Bus
6 Push Yes Yes
7 Cat
8 Cold
9 Stay Yes Yes
10 List
11 Cute
12 City
13 Pull
14 Bank
15 Coat
16 Fry
17 Gas
18 Gel
19 Hit
20 Mom Yes Yes
21 Face
22 Door
23 Duty Yes Yes
24 East
25 Movie Yes Yes
26 King
27 News Yes Yes
28 pain
29 End Yes Yes
30 Fat

Table1.2. Response Sheet of Subject 1 – Trial 2 | Condition 2

 Attentional Value
 = (Number of words correctly recognised * 100) / Total number of words presented
= (9* 100) / 20
= 45%

Trial 3:
Condition 3: Visual and Number Condition
Sr. No. Words Seen New Visual Auditory
1 Race Yes Yes
2 Good Yes
3 Hope Yes Yes
4 Game Yes
5 Bus Yes
6 Bun Yes
7 Cat Yes
8 Film Yes Yes
9 Stay Yes
10 List Yes
11 Home Yes
12 Jump Yes
13 Pull Yes
14 Bank Yes
15 cook Yes Yes
16 Fire Yes Yes
17 Gas Yes
18 Gel Yes
19 Hit Yes
20 King Yes Yes
21 Face Yes
22 Hide Yes
23 Duty Yes
24 Bird Yes
25 Film Yes
26 Baby Yes Yes
27 News Yes Yes
28 pain Yes
29 End Yes Yes
30 Fat Yes

Table1.3. Response Sheet of Subject 1 – Trial 3 | Condition 3

 Attentional Value
 = (Number of words correctly recognised * 100) / Total number of words presented
= (8* 100) / 10
= 80% 
 Total Odd Numbers 
=8

Results for subject 1:

Trials Condition Scores
1 1 110%
2 2 45%
3 3 80% odd no.=8

Subject 2:
Qualitative result

Quantitative result
Trial 1:
Condition 3: Visual and Number Condition

Sr. No. Words Seen New Visual Auditory

1 Race Yes Yes
2 Good Yes
3 Hope Yes Yes
4 Game Yes
5 Bus Yes
6 Bun Yes
7 Cat Yes
8 Film Yes Yes
9 Stay Yes
10 List Yes
11 Home Yes Yes
12 Jump Yes
13 Pull Yes
14 Bank Yes
15 cook Yes Yes
16 Fire Yes Yes
17 Gas Yes
18 Gel Yes
19 Hit Yes
20 King Yes
21 Face Yes
22 Hide Yes
23 Duty Yes
24 Bird Yes Yes
25 Film Yes
26 Baby Yes Yes
27 News Yes
28 pain Yes
29 End Yes
30 Fat Yes

Table1.4. Response Sheet of Subject 2 – Trial 1 | Condition 3

 Attentional Value
 = (Number of words correctly recognised * 100) / Total number of words presented
= (8* 100) / 10
=80 % 

 Total Odd Numbers 

=6
Trial 2:
Condition 2: Visual and Audio Words Condition
Sr. No. Words Seen New Visual Auditory
1 Bake Yes Yes
2 Jump Yes Yes
3 Tree Yes
4 Game Yes Yes
5 Bus Yes Yes
6 Push Yes Yes
7 Cat Yes
8 Cold Yes
9 Stay Yes Yes
10 List Yes Yes
11 Cute Yes Yes
12 City Yes Yes
13 Pull Yes
14 Bank Yes
15 Coat Yes Yes
16 Fry Yes
17 Gas Yes
18 Gel Yes
19 Hit Yes
20 Mom Yes Yes
21 Face Yes
22 Door Yes
23 Duty Yes Yes
24 East Yes
25 Movie Yes Yes
26 King Yes Yes
27 News Yes
28 pain Yes
29 End Yes
30 Fat Yes

Table1.5. Response Sheet of Subject 2 – Trial 2 | Condition 2

 Attentional Value
 = (Number of words correctly recognised * 100) / Total number of words presented
= (14* 100) / 20
= 70%

Trial 3:
Condition 1: Visual condition
Sr. No. Words Seen New Visual Auditory
1 Diary Yes Yes
2 Bottle Yes
3 Bucket Yes
4 Iron Yes
5 Speaker Yes
6 Packet Yes Yes
7 Grinder Yes
8 Sweater Yes
9 Bag Yes
10 Broom Yes
11 Paper Yes
12 Chair Yes
13 Battery Yes
14 Chewing Yes Yes
Gum
15 Tissue Yes Yes
16 Shampoo Yes Yes
17 A/C Yes
18 Pillow Yes
19 Punching Yes
Machine
20 Glasses Yes Yes
21 Plate Yes
22 Type writer Yes
23 Grains Yes
24 Socks Yes
25 Watch Yes Yes
26 Camera Yes
27 Stamp Yes
28 I-Pad Yes
29 Post card Yes Yes
30 Charger Yes

Table1.6. Response Sheet of Subject 2 – Trial 3 | Condition 1

 Attentional Value
 = (Number of words correctly recognised * 100) / Total number of words presented
= (8 * 100) / 10
= 80% 

Results for subject 2:

Trials Condition Scores
1 3 80% odd no.=6
2 2 70%
3 1 80%

DISCUSSION

This particular experiment was then undertaken to understand the relationship between
independent and dependent variable- to find out different types of attention by measurement
through recognition. 3 distinct conditions – namely (1) Visual Condition (2) Visual and
Audio Words Condition (3) Visual and Number Condition were administered for the purpose
of data collection. Attention is referred to a state in which cognitive resources are focused on
certain aspects of the environment rather than on others and the central nervous system is in a
state of readiness to respond to stimuli.
The three conditions administered for the purpose of data collection yield an Attentional
Value in terms of percentages. 
These Attentional Values are analysed like percentages. Scores closer to 0 represent poor
levels of attention while those farther from it towards 100 portray a stronger result.

For Subject 1, we observe the following Attentional Values across 3 conditions.

Trials Condition Scores
1 1 110%
2 2 45%
3 3 80% odd no.=8

For subject 2, we observe the following attentional values across 3 conditions.

Trials Condition Scores
1 3 80% odd no.=6
2 2 70%
3 1 80%

Subject 1 scores110% on the Visual Condition, 45% when Visual and Audio Words
Condition is presented and 80% on Visual and Number Condition. 
We understand how focused attention, as measured in the condition 1 – Visual condition, is
the most effective of these values. Individuals can perform very well when they have only
one stimulus to focus on.
Condition 2 - Visual and Auditory Words The condition that recognizes a person's attentional
divergence by visually and auditory word presentation has the lowest score among all
conditions. Similar stimuli applied are difficult to distinguish in comparison to the original
source, resulting in lower ratings.
Finally, condition 3 is a visual and number condition in which digits are included along with
the words, with criteria for visually presented word concentration and auditory presented
overall odd numbers. Yes, it is the subject's selective attention that is measured. This is
considered a moderate achievement when viewed alongside other types of conditioned
attention. Distinguishing between odd and even numbers requires additional mental training,
but numbers and words are still distinct stimuli and are easily distinguishable. This gives
relatively better results than condition 2.
Discussing subject 1 and subject 2, both the subjects did really well in condition 1 and
condition 3. However, subject 2 relatively has higher scores in the conditions- portraying that
they have better focused, and selective attention in comparison to subject 1.
Discussing these results in the context of the original hypothesis, we can conclude that the
hypothesis 1 and 3 was validated.
Hypothesis 2 has been rejected.
CONCLUSION
this particular experiment, undertaken to understand the relationship between independent
and dependent variable- to find out different types of attention by measurement through
recognition yields results reporting that older individuals have relatively better levels of
attention in comparison to relatively younger individuals.
 LIMITATIONS

1. The subject was feeling a little fatigued. In addition, they also had some pain
in their eyes due to long-work hours in front of the screen.

2. The environmental factors like noise, lights, temperature could not be

controlled in entirety.

3. The experiment was done on a single subject; thus, the results cannot be
generalised on all. 

4. The experiment included only female participants; thus, the results of the
experiment cannot be generalized to the population. 

USES OF THE EXPERIMENT

1. Selective attention being the ability to enhance relevant signals and manage distraction.,
appears to impact academics greatly, especially language, literacy, and math skills at a
significant level. Garnering an understanding of attentional levels amongst youth, then has
important implications for the educational systems. (Stevensa & Bavelier, 2011)

2. Since attention plays a critical role in essentially all aspects of perception, cognition, and
action, influencing the choices we make. Being highly prevalent, then, in major sections of
functioning, it becomes advantageous to be well acquainted with it. (Lindsay, 2020)

3. Attention plays a critical role in almost every area of life including school, work, and
relationships. It allows people to focus on information in order to create memories. It also
allows people to avoid distractions so that they can focus on and complete specific tasks.
Having data then, about levels of attention amongst youngsters aids in strategizing
interventions towards the betterment. (Cherry, How We Use Selective Attention to Filter
Information and Focus, 2022)

REFERENCES
Attention. (n.d.). Wikipedia.
Attention. (2007). In G. R. VandenBos, APA Dictionary of Psychology. 
Bhandari., P. (2021). Within-Subjects Design. Scribbr.
Cummings, J. A., & Sanders, L. (2019). Attention. In Introduction to Psychology. 
Divided Attention. (2007). In G. R. VandenBos, APA Dictionary of Psychology. 
Experimental Designs. (2013). In P. C. Price, RESEARCH METHODS IN PSYCHOLOGY. 
Selective Attention. (2007). In G. R. VandenBos, APA Dictionary of Psychology. 
Effect of divided attention on the production of false memories in DRM paradigam: A study of
dichotic listening and shadowing- Eduarda Pimentel and Pedro B. Albuquerque (2013)
Divison of attention: Age differences on a visually presented memory task.

Effects of divided attention at retrieval on conceptual implicit memory (2016)

APPENDIX

INFORMED CONSENT

SUBJECT 1: SUBJECT 2: