CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 19Digital Media and PhilosophyEthics and Social Impacts of AIEmbodied and Extended Cognition

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Attention is all they need: Cognitive science and the (techno)political economy of attention in humans and machines

Open access
de la Torre, Pablo González, Pérez-Verdugo, Marta, Barandiaran, Xabier E.·2024·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2405.06478arXiv 2405.06478
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This paper critically analyses the "attention economy" within the framework of cognitive science and techno-political economics, as applied to both human and machine interactions. We explore how current business models, particularly in digital platform capitalism, harness user engagement by strategically shaping attentional patterns. These platforms utilize advanced AI and massive data analytics to enhance user engagement, creating a cycle of attention capture and data extraction. We review contemporary (neuro)cognitive theories of attention and platform engagement design techniques and criticize classical cognitivist and behaviourist theories for their inadequacies in addressing the potential harms of such engagement on user autonomy and wellbeing. 4E approaches to cognitive science, instead, emphasizing the embodied, extended, enactive, and ecological aspects of cognition, offer us an intrinsic normative standpoint and a more integrated understanding of how attentional patterns are actively constituted by adaptive digital environments. By examining the precarious nature of habit formation in digital contexts, we reveal the techno-economic underpinnings that threaten personal autonomy by disaggregating habits away from the individual, into an AI managed collection of behavioural patterns. Our current predicament suggests the necessity of a paradigm shift towards an ecology of attention. This shift aims to foster environments that respect and preserve human cognitive and social capacities, countering the exploitative tendencies of cognitive capitalism.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2405.06478

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The attention economy is already showing devastating effects on human autonomy and well-being.

    “If the attention economy is already showing its devastating effect on human autonomy and well-being [Bhargava and Velasquez, 2020, González de la Torre et al., 2024, Williams, 2018], it is hard to imagine the potential negative impact of an intention economy deployed through generative human cognitive steering.”

    From Generative midtended cognition and Artificial Intelligence: thinging with thinging things (2025) · cites this paper as González de la Torre et al., 2024

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 103

  1. Aagaard J (2015) Drawn to distraction: a qualitative study of off-task use of educational technology. Comput Educ 87:90-97. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. compe du. 2015. 03. 010 · DOI
  2. Allport A (1987) Selection for action: Some behavioral and neuro- physiological considerations of attention and action. In: Heuer H, Sanders A (eds) Perspectives on perception and action. Perspectives on perception and action. Routledge, Milton Park, pp 395-420
  3. Allport A (2011) Attention and integration. Attention: Philosophical & Psychological essays. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 24-59
  4. Alter A (2017) Irresistible: the rise of addictive technology and the business of keeping us hooked. Penguin, New York
  5. Andreas J (2022) Language models as agent models. arXiv. https:// doi. org/ 10. 48550/ ARXIV. 2212. 01681 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Atchley P, Lane S (2014) Cognition in the Attention Economy. In: Ross BH (ed) Psychology of Learning and Motivation, vol 61. Aca- demic Press, San Diego, pp 133-177. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/ B978-0-12-800283-4. 00004-6 · DOI
  7. Barandiaran XE (2017) Autonomy and enactivism: towards a theory of sensorimotor autonomous agency. Topoi 36(3):409-430. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11245-016-9365-4 · DOI
  8. Barandiaran XE, Di Paolo EA (2014) A genealogical map of the con- cept of habit. Front Hum Neurosci 8:522. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3389/ fnhum. 2014. 00522 · DOI
  9. Barandiaran XE, Calleja-López A, Monterde A, Romero C (2024) Decidim, a technopolitical network for participatory democracy: philosophy, practice and autonomy of a collective platform in the age of digital intelligence. Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978-3-031-50784-7 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Barandiaran XE (2008) Mental life: a naturalized approach to the autonomy of cognitive agents. PhD Thesis, University of the Basque Country (UPV-EHU). http:// www. baran diaran. net/ phdth esis/
  11. Beller J (2006) The cinematic mode of production: attention econ- omy and the society of the spectacle. Dartmouth College Press, Hanover
  12. Beller J (2018) The message is murder: substrates of computational capital. Pluto Press. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2307/j. ctt1x 07z9t Bevendorff J, Wiegmann M, Potthast M, Stein B (2024) Is Google getting worse? A longitudinal investigation of SEO spam in search engines. In: Goharian N, Tonellotto N, He Y, Lipani A, McDonald G, Macdonald C, Ounis I (eds) Advances in informa- tion retrieval, vol 14610. Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham, pp 56-71. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978-3-031-56063-7_4 · DOI
  13. Bhargava VR, Velasquez M (2020) Ethics of the attention economy: the problem of social media addiction. Bus Ethics Q 31(3):321-359. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1017/ beq. 2020. 32 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Bødker S, Dindler C, Iversen OS, Smith RC (2022) Participatory Design. Springer International Publishing, Berlin. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978-3-031-02235-7 · DOI
  15. Broadbent DE (1958) Perception and communication. Pergamon Press, Oxford, p 340
  16. Calvo P, Gomila T (eds) (2008) Handbook of cognitive science: an embodied approach. Elsevier, Amsterdam
  17. Castro C, Pham AK (2020) Is the Attention Economy Noxious? Philos Impr 20(17):1-13
  18. Citton Y (2017) The ecology of attention, English. Polity, Cambridge
  19. Clark A (2003) Natural-born cyborgs: Minds, technologies, and the future of human intelligence. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  20. Clark A, Chalmers DJ (1998) The extended mind. Analysis 58(1):7-19
  21. Clear J (2019) Atomic habits (EXP): an easy & proven way to build good habits & break bad ones. Penguin, New York
  22. Coeckelbergh M (2022) The political philosophy of AI: An introduc- tion. Polity, Cambridge
  23. Crary J (2001) Suspensions of perception: Attention, spectacle, and modern culture 1 MIT Press paperback. The MIT Press, Cambridge
  24. Crawford K (2021) Atlas of AI: power, politics, and the planetary costs of artificial intelligence. Yale University Press, New Haven
  25. Deleuze G (1992) Postscript on the societies of control, vol 59. Rout- ledge, Milton Park, pp 3-7
  26. Desimone R, Duncan J (1995) Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annu Rev Neurosci 18(1):193-222
  27. Di Paolo EA, Buhrmann T, Barandiaran XE (2017) Sensorimotor life: an enactive proposal, 1st edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  28. Dubber MD, Pasquale F, Das S (eds) (2020) The Oxford Handbook of Ethics of AI, 1st edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1093/ oxfor dhb/ 97801 90067 397. 001. 0001 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Duncan J (2006) EPS mid-career award 2004: brain mechanisms of attention. Quart J Exp Psychol 59(1):2-27. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 17470 21050 02606 74 · DOI
  30. Egbert MD, Barandiaran XE (2014) Modeling habits as self-sustaining patterns of sensorimotor behavior. Front Hum Neurosci 8:590. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3389/ fnhum. 2014. 00590 · DOI
  31. Feenberg A (2012) Questioning technology. Routledge, Milton Park
  32. Feenberg A (2017) Technosystem: the social life of reason. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
  33. Floridi L (2023) The ethics of artificial intelligence: Principles, chal- lenges, and opportunities. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  34. Fodor JA (1980) The language of thought, 1st edn. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
  35. Fogg B (2009) A behavior model for persuasive design. Proceedings of the 4th international conference on persuasive technology- persuasive 2009. ACM Digital Library, New York. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1145/ 15419 48. 15419 99 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Gallagher S (2013) The socially extended mind. Cogn Syst Res 25-26:4-12. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. cogsys. 2013. 03. 008 · DOI · Paper page
  37. Gallagher S (2023) Embodied and enactive approaches to cognition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
  38. Gallo A (2017) A refresher on A/B testing. Harvard Business Review, Brighton Gibson JJ (1979) The ecological approach to visual perception, Classic. Houghton Mifflin, Boston
  39. Gray CM, Kou Y, Battles B, Hoggatt J, Toombs AL (2018) The dark (patterns) side of UX design. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI con- ference on human factors in computing systems. ACM Digital Library, New York, pp 1-14. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1145/ 31735 74. 31741 · DOI
  40. Griziotti G (with Terranova T) (2019) Neurocapitalism: Technological mediation and vanishing lines (JF McGimsey, Trans.; English edition). Minor Compositions.
  41. Hayles NK (2007) Hyper and deep attention: the generational divide in cognitive modes. Profession 2007(1):187-199. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1632/ prof. 2007. 2007.1. 187 · DOI
  42. Held V (2006) The ethics of care: Personal, political, and global. Oxford Univ, Press
  43. Heras-Escribano M (2019) The philosophy of affordances. Springer International Publishing, Berlin. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978-3-319-98830-6 · DOI · Paper page
  44. Hou H, Jia S, Hu S, Fan R, Sun W, Sun T, Zhang H (2012) Reduced striatal dopamine transporters in people with internet addiction disorder. Biomed Res Int 2012:e854524. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1155/ 2012/ 854524 · DOI · Paper page
  45. Hui Y (2016) On the existence of digital objects. University of Min- nesota Press, Minnesota
  46. Hutchins E (1995) Cognition in the Wild, vol 262082314. MIT press, Cambridge MA
  47. Johnson J (2014) Designing with the mind in mind simple: simple guide to understanding user interface design guidelines, 2nd edn. Elsevier, Amsterdam
  48. Joque J (2018) Deconstruction machines: Writing in the age of Cyber- war. University of Minnesota Press, Minnesota
  49. Lin P, Jenkins R, Abney K (eds) (2020) Robot 2.0 ethics: From autono- mous cars to artificial intelligence (First issued as an Oxford University Press paperback). Oxford University Press, Oxford
  50. Lovink G (2019) Sad by design: on platform nihilism. Pluto press, London
  51. Maiese M, Hanna R (2019) The Mind-Body Politic. Springer International Publishing, Berlin. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978-3-030-19546-5 · DOI
  52. McQuillan D (2022) Resisting AI: an anti-fascist approach to artificial intelligence. Bristol University Press, Bristol
  53. Merleau-Ponty M (2006) Phenomenology of perception: An introduc- tion (Repr). Routledge, Milton Park Mole C (2011) Attention is cognitive unison: an essay in philosophical psychology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, USA
  54. Moll J (2019) An Autopsy of Data Business. https:// aksio ma. org/ joana-moll MongeRoffarello A, Lukoff K, De Russis L (2023) Defining and iden- tifying attention capture deceptive designs in digital interfaces. Proceedings of the 2023 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM Digital Library, New York, pp 1-19
  55. Moreno A, Mossio M (2015) Biological autonomy: a philosophical and theoretical enquiry. Springer, Berlin
  56. MoulierBoutang Y (2011) Cognitive capitalism. Polity Press, Cambridge
  57. Navon D (1984) Resources-a theoretical soup stone? Psychol Rev 91(2):216-234. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ 0033-295X. 91.2. 216 · DOI
  58. Neumann O (1987) Beyond capacity: a functional view of attention. In: Heuer H, Sanders A (eds) Perspectives on perception and action (psychology library editions: cognitive science). Routledge, Mil- ton Park, pp 361-394
  59. Newell A, Simon HA (1976) Computer science as empirical inquiry: Symbols and search. Commun ACM 19:113-126
  60. Newen A, Bruin LD, Gallagher S (2018a) The Oxford handbook of 4E cognition. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  61. Newen A, Gallagher S, De Bruin L (2018) 4E Cognition: Historical Roots, Key Concepts, and Central Issues. In: Newen A, De Bruin L, Gallagher S (eds) The Oxford handbook of 4E cogni- tion. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 2-16. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1093/ oxfor dhb/ 97801 98735 410. 013. · DOI
  62. Nodder C (2013) Evil by design: interaction design to lead us into temptation. Wiley, Hoboken
  63. Noë A (2004) Action in perception. The MIT Press, Cambridge
  64. Nussbaum M (2003) Capabilities as fundamental entitlements: sen and social justice. Fem Econ 9(2-3):33-59. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 13545 70022 00007 7926 · DOI · Paper page
  65. O'Brien H (2016) Theoretical perspectives on user engagement. In: O'Brien H, Cairns P (eds) Why engagement matters: cross- disciplinary perspectives of user engagement in digital media. Springer International Publishing, Berlin, pp 1-26. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978-3-319-27446-1_1 · DOI
  66. Olsen J-KB, Pedersen SA, Hendricks VF (eds) (2013) A companion to the philosophy of technology, Paperback. Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken
  67. Pasquinelli M (2018) Metadata society. In: Braidotti R, Hlavajova M (eds) Posthuman Glossary. Bloomsbury, London
  68. Pasquinelli M, Joler V (2021) The Nooscope manifested: AI as instrument of knowledge extractivism. AI & Soc 36(4):1263- 1280. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s00146-020-01097-6 · DOI
  69. Pérez-Verdugo M, Barandiaran X (2023) Personal autonomy and (digital) technology: an enactive sensorimotor framework. Phil Technol. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s13347-023-00683-y · DOI
  70. Protevi J (2009) Political affect: connecting the social and the somatic. University of Minnesota Press, Minnesota
  71. Protevi J (2013) Life, war, earth: Deleuze and the sciences. Univer- sity of Minnesota Press, Minnesota
  72. Protevi J (2022) COVID-19 in the United States as affective frame. Front Psychol 13:897215. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3389/ fpsyg. 2022. · DOI
  73. Putnam H (1965) The mental life of some machines. Philosophical papers: Volume 2, Mind Language and Reality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 408-428
  74. Ramírez-Vizcaya S, Froese T (2019) The enactive approach to habits: new concepts for the cognitive science of bad habits and addic- tion. Front Psychol. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3389/ fpsyg. 2019. 00301 · DOI
  75. Robbins P, Aydede M (eds) (2008) The Cambridge Handbook of Situated Cognition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1017/ CBO97 80511 816826 · DOI
  76. Roberge J, Castelle M (eds) (2021) The cultural life of machine learning: an incursion into critical AI studies. Palgrave Mac- millan, London
  77. Rogers K (2013) The attention complex: media, archeology, method. Palgrave Macmillan, London
  78. Ros R, Runeson P (2018) Continuous experimentation and A/B testing: a mapping study. Proceedings of the 4th international workshop on rapid continuous software engineering. ACM Digital Library, New York, pp 35-41
  79. Ruff CC (2011) A systems-neuroscience view of attention. In: Mole C, Smithies D, Wu W (eds) Attention: philosophical and psycho- logical essays. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 1-23
  80. Ruiz-Mirazo K, Moreno A (2004) Basic autonomy as a fundamental step in the synthesis of life. Artif Life 10(3):235-259. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1162/ 10645 46041 255584 · DOI
  81. Sani SM, Shokooh YK (2016) Minimalism in designing user interface of commercial websites based on Gestalt visual perception laws (case study of three top brands in technology scope). Second Int Conf Web Res 2016:115-124. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1109/ ICWR. 2016. 74984 55 · DOI
  82. Satz D (2010) Why some things should not be for sale: the moral limits of markets. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  83. Shapiro L (2019) Embodied cognition. Routledge, Milton Park Sharp H, Rogers Y, Preece J (2023) Interaction design: beyond human- computer interaction, 6th edn. John Wiley & Sons Inc., Hoboken
  84. Simon HA (1971) Designing organizations for an information rich world. In: Greenberger M (ed) Computers, communications, and the public interest. Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, pp 37-72
  85. Slaby J (2016) Mind invasion: situated affectivity and the corporate life hack. Front Psychol. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3389/ fpsyg. 2016. 00266 · DOI · Paper page
  86. Smart P, Heersmink R, Clowes RW (2017) The cognitive ecology of the internet. In: Cowley SJ, Vallée-Tourangeau F (eds) Cognition Beyond the brain: computation, interactivity and human artifice. Springer International Publishing, Berlin, pp 251-282
  87. Srnicek N (2016) Platform capitalism. Polity Press, Cambridge
  88. Stiegler B (2010) Taking care of youth and the generations. Stanford University Press, Redwood
  89. Stiegler B (2019) The age of disruption: technology and madness in computational capitalism, English. Polity Press, Cambridge
  90. Sunstein CR (2017) #Republic: Divided democracy in the age of social media. Princeton University Press, Princeton
  91. Sweller J, Ayres P, Kalyuga S (2011) Cognitive load theory. Springer, Berlin
  92. Thompson E (2007) Mind in life: biology, phenomenology, and the sciences of the mind. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
  93. Thompson E (2020) Why I am not a Buddhist. Yale University Press, New Haven
  94. Thompson E, Varela FJ (2001) Radical embodiment: neural dynamics and consciousness. Trends Cogn Sci 5(10):418-425. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/ S1364-6613(00) 01750-2 · DOI · Paper page
  95. Varela FJ, Rosch E, Thompson E (1991) The embodied mind: cognitive science and human experience. MIT Press, Cambridge
  96. Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, Uszkoreit J, Jones L, Gomez AN, Kaiser Ł, Polosukhin I (2017) Attention is all you need. Advances in neural information processing systems. MIT Press, Cambridge
  97. Wang L, Ma C, Feng X, Zhang Z, Yang H, Zhang J, Chen Z, Tang J, Chen X, Lin Y, Zhao WX, Wei Z, Wen J-R (2024) A survey on large language model based autonomous agents. Front Comp Sci 18(6):186345. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11704-024-40231-1 · DOI · Paper page
  98. Wheeler M (2007) Reconstructing the cognitive world: the next step. MIT Press, Cambridge
  99. Williams J (2018) Stand out of our light: freedom and resistance in the attention economy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
  100. Winner L (1978) Autonomous technology: technics-out-of-control as a theme in political thought. MIT Press, Cambridge
  101. Wise RA (2004) Dopamine, learning and motivation. Nat Rev Neurosci 5(6):483-494. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1038/ nrn14 06 · DOI · Paper page
  102. Wu W (2014) Attention. Routledge, Milton Park Wu T (2016) The Attention Merchants: The Epic Scramble to Get Insid…. Knopf
  103. Xi Z, Chen W, Guo X, He W, Ding Y, Hong B, Zhang M, Wang J, Jin S, Zhou E, Zheng R, Fan X, Wang X, Xiong L, Zhou Y, Wang W, Jiang C, Zou Y, Liu X, Gui T (2023) The rise and potential of large language model based agents: a survey. Springer, Berlin

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
de la Torre, P. G., Pérez-Verdugo, M., & Barandiaran, X. E.
Affiliations
University of the Basque Country (ES)
Corresponding author
de la Torre, Pablo González
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
Volume
41
Issue
1
Pages
5-21
ISSN
0951-5666 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2405.06478
arXiv
2405.06478
OpenAlex
W4411722349
Cited by
19
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 4
FWCI
17.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • AI & Society (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Eusko Jaurlaritza (IT16668-22)
  • Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea
  • Agencia Estatal de Investigación (PID 2019-104576GB-I00, PRE2020-096494)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Digital Media and Philosophy
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
Keywords
attention economy, cognitive science, platform capitalism, user engagement, data extraction, 4E cognition, embodied cognition, extended mind, enactive cognition, ecological cognition, habit formation, user autonomy, well-being, cognitive capitalism

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review