持续注意悖论:对完全警惕理论不可能性的批判

IF 2.3 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Benjamin T. Sharpe, Ian Tyndall
{"title":"持续注意悖论:对完全警惕理论不可能性的批判","authors":"Benjamin T. Sharpe,&nbsp;Ian Tyndall","doi":"10.1111/cogs.70061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The human capacity for sustained attention represents a critical cognitive paradox: while essential for numerous high-stakes tasks, perfect vigilance is fundamentally impossible. This commentary explores the theoretical impossibility of maintaining uninterrupted attention, drawing from extensive interdisciplinary research in cognitive science, neuroscience, and psychology. Multiple converging lines of evidence demonstrate that sustained attention is constrained by neural, biological, and cognitive limitations. Neural mechanisms reveal that attention operates through rhythmic oscillations, with inherent fluctuations in frontoparietal networks and default mode network interactions. Neurochemical systems and cellular adaptation effects further underscore the impossibility of continuous, perfect vigilance. Empirical research across domains—including aviation, healthcare, industrial safety, and security—consistently demonstrates rapid declines in attention performance over time, regardless of individual expertise or motivation. Even elite performers like military personnel and experienced meditators exhibit inevitable attention lapses. This paper presents an argument against traditional approaches that seek to overcome these limitations through training or willpower. Instead, it advocates for designing human–technology systems that work harmoniously with cognitive constraints. This requires developing adaptive automation, understanding individual and cultural attention variations, and creating frameworks that strategically balance human capabilities with technological support.</p>","PeriodicalId":48349,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Science","volume":"49 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cogs.70061","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Sustained Attention Paradox: A Critical Commentary on the Theoretical Impossibility of Perfect Vigilance\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin T. Sharpe,&nbsp;Ian Tyndall\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cogs.70061\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The human capacity for sustained attention represents a critical cognitive paradox: while essential for numerous high-stakes tasks, perfect vigilance is fundamentally impossible. This commentary explores the theoretical impossibility of maintaining uninterrupted attention, drawing from extensive interdisciplinary research in cognitive science, neuroscience, and psychology. Multiple converging lines of evidence demonstrate that sustained attention is constrained by neural, biological, and cognitive limitations. Neural mechanisms reveal that attention operates through rhythmic oscillations, with inherent fluctuations in frontoparietal networks and default mode network interactions. Neurochemical systems and cellular adaptation effects further underscore the impossibility of continuous, perfect vigilance. Empirical research across domains—including aviation, healthcare, industrial safety, and security—consistently demonstrates rapid declines in attention performance over time, regardless of individual expertise or motivation. Even elite performers like military personnel and experienced meditators exhibit inevitable attention lapses. This paper presents an argument against traditional approaches that seek to overcome these limitations through training or willpower. Instead, it advocates for designing human–technology systems that work harmoniously with cognitive constraints. This requires developing adaptive automation, understanding individual and cultural attention variations, and creating frameworks that strategically balance human capabilities with technological support.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48349,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognitive Science\",\"volume\":\"49 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cogs.70061\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognitive Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cogs.70061\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cogs.70061","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人类的持续注意力能力代表了一个重要的认知悖论:虽然对许多高风险任务至关重要,但从根本上说,完全保持警惕是不可能的。这篇评论从认知科学、神经科学和心理学的广泛跨学科研究出发,探讨了保持不间断注意力在理论上的不可能性。多种汇集在一起的证据表明,持续注意力受到神经、生物和认知的限制。神经机制揭示了注意力是通过有节奏的振荡来运作的,在额顶叶网络和默认模式网络的相互作用中存在固有的波动。神经化学系统和细胞适应效应进一步强调了持续、完美警觉的不可能性。包括航空、医疗保健、工业安全和安保在内的各个领域的经验研究一致表明,随着时间的推移,注意力的表现会迅速下降,与个人的专业知识或动机无关。即使是像军人和经验丰富的冥想者这样的精英,也不可避免地会出现注意力不集中的情况。本文反对试图通过训练或意志力来克服这些局限性的传统方法。相反,本文主张设计能与认知限制和谐共处的人类-技术系统。这就需要开发适应性强的自动化系统,了解个人和文化的注意力差异,并创建能够战略性地平衡人类能力和技术支持的框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Sustained Attention Paradox: A Critical Commentary on the Theoretical Impossibility of Perfect Vigilance

The human capacity for sustained attention represents a critical cognitive paradox: while essential for numerous high-stakes tasks, perfect vigilance is fundamentally impossible. This commentary explores the theoretical impossibility of maintaining uninterrupted attention, drawing from extensive interdisciplinary research in cognitive science, neuroscience, and psychology. Multiple converging lines of evidence demonstrate that sustained attention is constrained by neural, biological, and cognitive limitations. Neural mechanisms reveal that attention operates through rhythmic oscillations, with inherent fluctuations in frontoparietal networks and default mode network interactions. Neurochemical systems and cellular adaptation effects further underscore the impossibility of continuous, perfect vigilance. Empirical research across domains—including aviation, healthcare, industrial safety, and security—consistently demonstrates rapid declines in attention performance over time, regardless of individual expertise or motivation. Even elite performers like military personnel and experienced meditators exhibit inevitable attention lapses. This paper presents an argument against traditional approaches that seek to overcome these limitations through training or willpower. Instead, it advocates for designing human–technology systems that work harmoniously with cognitive constraints. This requires developing adaptive automation, understanding individual and cultural attention variations, and creating frameworks that strategically balance human capabilities with technological support.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cognitive Science
Cognitive Science PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
8.00%
发文量
139
期刊介绍: Cognitive Science publishes articles in all areas of cognitive science, covering such topics as knowledge representation, inference, memory processes, learning, problem solving, planning, perception, natural language understanding, connectionism, brain theory, motor control, intentional systems, and other areas of interdisciplinary concern. Highest priority is given to research reports that are specifically written for a multidisciplinary audience. The audience is primarily researchers in cognitive science and its associated fields, including anthropologists, education researchers, psychologists, philosophers, linguists, computer scientists, neuroscientists, and roboticists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信