A selective review of selective attention
research from the past century
Jon Driver*
University College London, UK
Research on attention is concerned with selective processing of incoming sensory
information. To some extent, our awareness of the world depends on what we choose to
attend, not merely on the stimulation entering our senses. British psychologists have
made substantial contributions to this topic in the past century. Celebrated examples
include Donald Broadbent’s lter theory of attention, which set the agenda for most
subsequent work; and Anne Treisman’s revisions of this account, and her later
feature-integrationtheory. More recent contributions include Alan Allport’s prescient
emphasis on the relevance of neuroscience data, and John Duncan’s integration of such
data with psychological theory. An idiosyncratic but roughly chronological review
of developments is presented, some practical and clinical implications are briey
sketched, and future directions suggested. One of the biggest changes in the eld has
been the increasing interplay between psychology and neuroscience, which promises
much for the future. A related change has been the realization that selection attention
is best thought of as a broad topic, encompassing a range of selective issues, rather than
as a single explanatory process.
What we see, hear, feel and remember depends not only on the information entering
our senses, but also upon which aspects of this we choose to attend. William James
(1890/1950, p. 402) emphasized this in asserting that ‘my experience is what I agree to
attend to’. We must all have been in situations where we failed to notice something in
daily life (be this a visual object, or words spoken to us) because our mind was engaged
with something else. Selective attention is the generic term for those mechanisms which
lead our experience to be dominated by one thing rather than another.
Selective attention has become a central topic in cognitive psychology, and more
recently in cognitive neuroscience also. Discussions of the topic within the British
Psychological Society date back as far as 1910 (Hicks, cited in Edgell, 1947), but here I
focus mainly on work from the 1950s onwards. Given this volume’s theme, I emphasize
distinctive British contributions to the topic. Fortunately, these include some of the
major developments in the eld, so a review emphasizing these may hopefully not
become too parochial (see Pashler, 1998; Yantis, 2000, for recent reviews with less of a
British emphasis). Space limits preclude an exhaustive review even of British research, so
I focus on research that has particularly inuenced me. My account follows a roughly
chronological structure. Many of the fundamental issues recur throughout the decades,
although there have been many remarkable changes also.
53 British Journal of Psychology (2001), 92, 53–78 Printed in Great Britain
© 2001 The British Psychological Society
* Requests for reprints should be addressed to Jon Driver, Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College
London, 17 Queen Square, London WC1N 3AR, UK (e-mail: j.driver@ucl.ac.uk).