Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T14:33:29.292Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Even “unconscious thought” is influenced by attentional mechanisms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2014

Narayanan Srinivasan  and
Sumitava Mukherjee
Narayanan Srinivasan
Affiliation:
Centre of Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences, University of Allahabad, Allahabad 211002, India. nsrini@cbcs.ac.inhttp://facweb.cbcs.ac.in/nsrini/
Sumitava Mukherjee
Affiliation:
Indian Institute of Technology Gandhinagar, Ahmedabad, 384424, India. sumitava.inbox@gmail.comhttps://sites.google.com/site/sumitavaehome/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this commentary, we focus on the role of attentional mechanisms in unconscious thought. We argue that even distracted or unconscious thought is capacity limited and differences in scope of attention influence processing during unconscious thought. Attention also would influence processes at different stages in the proposed lens model. We conclude that there is a clear need to understand the role of attention to better understand conscious or unconscious thought.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 37 , Issue 1 , February 2014 , pp. 40 - 41
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ashby, N. J. S., Glöckner, A. & Dickert, S. (2011) Conscious and unconscious thought in risky choice: Testing the capacity principle and the appropriate weighting principle of unconscious thought theory. Frontiers in Psychology 2:261.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baars, B. J. & Franklin, S. (2003) How conscious experience and working memory interact. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7:166–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baijal, S. & Srinivasan, N. (2009) Types of attention matter for awareness: A study with color afterimages. Consciousness & Cognition 18:1039–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dijksterhuis, A. & Nordgren, L. F. (2006) A theory of unconscious thought. Perspectives in Psychological Science 1:95–109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gigerenzer, G. & Gaissmaier, W. (2011) Heuristic decision making. Annual Review of Psychology 62:451–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kahneman, D. (2011) Thinking, fast and slow. Allen Lane and Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
McElree, B. (2006) Accessing recent events. In: The psychology of learning and motivation, vol. 46, ed. Ross, B. H., pp. 155–200. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Mukherjee, S. & Srinivasan, N. (2013) Attention in preferential choice. Progress in Brain Research 202:117–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Srinivasan, N. & Mukherjee, S. (2010) Attribute preference and selection in multi-attribute decision making: Implications for unconscious and conscious thought. Consciousness & Cognition 19:644–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Srinivasan, N., Mukherjee, S., Mishra, M. V. & Kesarwani, S. (2013) Evaluating the role of attention in the context of unconscious thought theory: Differential impact of attentional scope and load on preference and memory. Frontiers in Psychology 4:37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Usher, M., Russo, Z., Weyers, M., Brauner, R. & Zakay, D. (2011) The impact of the mode of thought in complex decisions: Intuitive decisions are better. Frontiers in Psychology 2(March):37. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00037.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, T. D. & Nisbett, R. E. (1978) The accuracy of verbal reports about the effects of stimuli on evaluations and behavior. Social Psychology 41:118–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar