Advertisement

Individual Differences in Resource Allocation Policy

  • Błażej Szymura
Chapter
Part of the The Springer Series on Human Exceptionality book series (SSHE)

Abstract

Apart from many other things, people differ in the way they allocate their attentional resources to the tasks they are engaged in. Individual differences in attentional resources management seem interesting as correlates of temperament/personality and intellectual traits (Eysenck, 1982; Nęcka, 1997). Although the differences in the effectiveness of attentional resources management with regard to individual difference variables are not very salient (these variables usually explain no more than 10–15% of variance in attentional task performance), it still seems worth asking whether people characterized by different levels of intelligence or creativity, a different necessity of extraversion, neuroticism or psychoticism trait also differ in the specificity of attentional functioning – the major strategy by which the cognitive system protects its limited capacity against overload (Broadbent, 1982). Knowledge of such relationships should increase our understanding of the cognitive mechanisms of human temperament/personality and intelligence. It should also be helpful in the creation of an integrated model of cognitive performance, which also takes into account interindividual variability.

Keywords

Attentional Resource Dual Task Dual Task Condition Arousal State Arousal Level 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Ackerman, P. L., Beier, M. E., & Boyle, M. O. (2005). Working memory and intelligence: The same or different constructs. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 30–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allport, A., Antonis, B., & Reynolds, P. (1972). On the division of attention: A disproof of the single channel hypothesis. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 24, 225–235.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson, K. J., & Revelle, W. (1983). The interactive effects of caffeine, impulsivity, and task demands on a visual search task. Personality and Individual Differences, 4, 127–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beh, H. C., & Harrod, M.-E. (1998). Physiological responses in high-P subjects during active and passive coping. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 28, 291–300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Broadbent, D. E. (1971). Decision and Stress. London: Academic.Google Scholar
  6. Broadbent, D. E. (1982). Task combination and selective intake of information. Acta Psychologica, 50, 253–290.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bullen, J. G., & Himsley, D. R. (1984). Psychoticism and visual recognition threshold. Personality and Individual Differences, 5, 633–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Claridge, G. S. (1987). Psychoticism and arousal. In J. Strelau & H. J. Eysenck (Eds.), Personality dimensions and arousal (pp. 133–150). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  9. Duffy, E. (1962). Activation and behavior. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  10. Easterbrook, J. A. (1959). The effect of emotion on cue utilisation and the organisation of behaviour. Psychological Review, 66, 183–201.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eysenck, H. J. (1967). The biological basis of personality. Springfield: CC Thomas.Google Scholar
  12. Eysenck, M. W. (1982). Attention and arousal. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eysenck, H. J. (1992). The definition and measurement of psychoticism. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 757–785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eysenck, H. J. (1994). Personality: Biological foundations. In P. A. Vernon (Ed.), The neuropsychology of individual differences (pp. 151–256). San Diego: Academic.Google Scholar
  15. Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, M. W. (1985). Personality and individual differences: A natural science approach. New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gale, A. (1969). “Stimulus hunger”: Individual differences in operant strategy in a button-pressing task. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 7, 265–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Geen, R. G. (1984). Preffered stimulations levels in introverts and extraverts: Effect on arousal and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 1303–1312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Groborz, M., & Nęcka, E. (2003). Creativity and cognitive control: Exploration of generation and evaluation skills. Creativity Research Journal, 15, 183–197.Google Scholar
  19. Gruszka, A. (1999). Relationship between basic personality dimensions and the attentional mechanism of cognitive inhibition. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 30, 129–142.Google Scholar
  20. Hasher, L., & Zacks, R. T. (1979). Automatic and effortful processes in memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 108, 356–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hirst, W., & Kalmar, D. (1987). Characterizing attentional resources. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116, 68–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Humphreys, M. S., & Revelle, W. (1984). Personality, motivation, and performance: A theory of the relationship between individual differences and information processing. Psychological Review, 91, 153–184.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hunt, E. (1980). Intelligence as an information processing concept. British Journal of Psychology, 71, 449–474.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hunt, E., & Lansman, M. (1982). Individual differences in attention. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (pp. 207–254). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.Google Scholar
  25. Jaušovec, N. (1997). Differences in EEG activity during the solution of closed and open problems. Creativity Research Journal, 10, 317–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jensen, A. R. (1982). The chronometry of intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (pp. 255–311). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.Google Scholar
  27. Jensen, A. R. (2005). Mental chronometry and the unification of differential psychology. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Pretz (Eds.), Cognition and intelligence (pp. 26–50). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  29. Kaiser, J., Beauvale, A., & Bener, J. (1997). Evoked cardiac response as a function of cognitive load differs between subjects separated on the main personality dimensions. Personality and Individual Differences, 22, 241–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kyllonen, P., & Christal, R. (1990). Reasoning ability is (little more than) working memory capacity? Intelligence, 14, 389–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Liao, I., & Moray, N. (1993). A simulation study of human performance deterioration and mental workload. Le Travail Humain, 6, 321–344.Google Scholar
  32. Mangan, G. L. (1974). Personality and conditioning: Some personality, cognitive and psychophysiological parameters of classical appetitive (sexual) GSR conditioning. Pavlovian Journal of Biological Science, 9, 125–135.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Martindale, C. (1999). Biological bases of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 137–152). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Martindale, C., Anderson, K., Moore, K., & West, A. N. (1996). Creativity, oversensitivity, and rate of habituation. Personality and Individual Differences, 20, 423–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Martindale, C., & Hines, D. (1975). Creativity and cortical activation during creative, intellectual, and EEG feedback tasks. Biological Psychology, 3, 71–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Matthews, G. (1987). Personality and multidimensional arousal: A study of two dimensions of extraversion. Personality and Individual Differences, 8, 9–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Matthews, G. (1992). Extraversion. In A. P. Smith & D. M. Jones (Eds.), Handbook of human performance (pp. 96–193). London: Academic.Google Scholar
  38. Matthews, G., & Amelang, M. (1993). Extraversion, arousal theory and performance: A study of individual differences in the EEG. Personality and Individual Differences, 14, 347–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Matthews, G., & Deary, I. J. (2002). Personality traits. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Matthews, G., & Desmond, P. A. (2002). Task-induced fatigue states and simulated driving performance. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55A, 659–686.Google Scholar
  41. Matthews, G., & Gilliland, K. (1999). The personality theories of H. J. Eysenck and J. A. Gray: a comparative review. Personality and Individual Differences, 26, 583–626.Google Scholar
  42. Moruzzi, G., & Magoun, H. W. (1949). Brain stem reticular formation and activation of the EEG. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 1, 455–473.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Navon, D. (1984). Resources – a theoretical soup stone? Psychological Review, 91, 216–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nęcka, E. (1997). Attention, working memory and arousal: Concepts apt to account for “the process of intelligence”. In G. Matthews (Ed.), Cognitive science perspectives on personality end emotion (pp. 503–554). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Nęcka, E. (1999). Creativity and attention. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 30, 85–97.Google Scholar
  46. Nęcka, E. (2000). Pobudzenie Intelektu. Zarys Formalnej Teorii Inteligencji. [The Formal Theory of Intelligence]. Cracow: Universitas.Google Scholar
  47. Ninio, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Reaction time in focused and in divided attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 103, 393–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Revelle, W., & Loftus, D. A. (1990). Individual differences and arousal: Implications for the study of mood and memory. Cognition and Emotion, 4, 209–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schweizer, K. (1996a). Level of encoding, preattentive processing and working memory capacity as sources of cognitive ability. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 759–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Schweizer, K. (1996b). The speed-accuracy transition due to task complexity. Intelligence, 22, 115–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Snodgrass, J. G., Luce, R. D., & Galanter, E. (1967). Some experiments on simple and choice reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 75, 1–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Stankov, L. (1983). Attention and intelligence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 471–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Stankov, L. (1988). Attention and intelligence. Psychology of Aging, 3, 59–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Stankov, L. (2005). Reductionism versus charting: Ways of examining the role o lower-order cognitive processes in intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Pretz (Eds.), Cognition and intelligence (pp. 51–67). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Stavridou, A., & Furnham, A. (1996). The relationship between psychoticism, trait creativity and the attentional mechanism of cognitive inhibition. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 143–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Stelmack, R. M. (1981). The psychophysiology of extraversion and neuroticism. In H. J. Eysenck (Ed.), A model of personality (pp. 38–64). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sternberg, R. (2001). What is the common thread of creativity? American Psychologist, 56, 360–362.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Szymura, B. (1999). On the organization of the processes of selective attention. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 30, 69–84.Google Scholar
  59. Szymura, B., & Nęcka, E. (1998). Visual selective attention and personality: An experimental verification of three models of extroversion. Personality and Individual Differences, 24, 713–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Szymura, B., & Nęcka, E. (2005). Three superfactors of personality and three aspects of attention. In A. Eliasz, S. E. Hampson, & B. de Raad (Eds.), Advances in personality psychology (pp. 75–90). Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  61. Szymura, B., & Nęcka, E. (in prep.). Attention and intelligence. Manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar
  62. Szymura, B., Śmigasiewicz, K., & Corr, P. J. J. (2007). Psychoticism and flexibility of attention. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 2033–2046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Szymura, B., & Wodniecka, Z. (2003). What really bothers neurotics? In search for factors impairing attentional performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 109–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Thayer, R. E. (1989). The biopsychology of mood and arousal. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Wickens, C. D. (1984). Processing resources in attention. In R. Parasuraman & R. Davies (Eds.), Varieties of attention (pp. 63–101). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  66. Yerkes, R. M., & Dodson, J. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimuli to rapidity of habit-information. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Zuckerman, M. (1997). The psychobiological basis of personality. In H. Nyborg (Ed.), The scientific study of human nature: Tribute to Hans J. Eysenck at eighty (pp. 3–16). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Błażej Szymura
    • 1
  1. 1.Jagiellonian UniversityCracowPoland

Personalised recommendations