Journal of Psychology and Cognition

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.
Reach Us +441518081136

Commentary - Journal of Psychology and Cognition (2025) Volume 10, Issue 2

Cognitiveââ?¬â??Energetical Perspectives on Attention Regulation Under Stress

Benjamin Yorke*

Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Institute of Reproduction and Development, Fudan University Shanghai China

*Corresponding Author:
Benjamin Yorke
Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital
Institute of Reproduction and Development
Fudan University Shanghai China
E-mail: ben.yorke007@gmail.com

Received: 03-Mar-2025, Manuscript No. AAJPC-25-166671; Editor assigned: 04-Mar-2025, PreQC No. AAJPC-25-166671 (PQ); Reviewed: 18-Mar-2025, QC No. AAJPC-25-166671; Revised: 24-Mar-2025, Manuscript No. AAJPC-25-166671 (R); Published: 31-Mar-2025, DOI: 10.35841/aajpc-10.2.288

Citation: Yorke B. Cognitive–Energetical Perspectives on Attention Regulation Under Stress. J Psychol Cognition .2025;10(2):288

Visit for more related articles at Journal of Psychology and Cognition

Introduction

Attention is the gatekeeper of cognition, allowing individuals to prioritize relevant stimuli while ignoring distractions. Under stress, this gatekeeper often falters, leading to errors, impulsive actions, or cognitive overload. The cognitive–energetical perspective, rooted in the work of researchers like Kahneman (1973), Sanders (1983), and Hockey (1997), offers a framework for understanding how mental energy and attentional control adapt—or fail to adapt—under stress [1].

This approach posits that performance is shaped by both structural limitations (e.g., working memory capacity) and energetical constraints (e.g., available cognitive resources and arousal levels). The theory argues that under stress, attentional regulation becomes more effortful and error-prone due to fluctuating arousal and motivational states [2].

Kahneman (1973) proposed that attention is a limited resource distributed among tasks based on capacity and demand. Arousal plays a pivotal role in determining available cognitive resources. Mild arousal can optimize attentional focus, but excessive arousal—often triggered by stress—leads to narrowed attention and impaired multitasking [3].

Stress primarily affects the energetical and strategic levels. In high-demand situations, the system may divert resources from less urgent processes to maintain immediate task performance, leading to fatigue, slower response times, and deteriorated accuracy over time [4].

Hockey introduced the idea of compensatory control, where individuals exert extra mental effort to maintain performance under stress. While this mechanism temporarily preserves task efficiency, it comes at the cost of increased fatigue, irritability, and reduced cognitive flexibility. Chronic reliance on compensatory effort can have long-term psychological consequences [5].

Stress typically increases arousal, but the impact on attention depends on the intensity and duration of the stressor. According to the Yerkes-Dodson Law, performance improves with arousal to an optimal point, beyond which it declines. Cognitive–energetical theories agree with this inverted-U relationship, but add a nuanced view of how individuals allocate effort [6].

Employees in high-pressure roles (e.g., healthcare, aviation, law enforcement) often rely on attentional regulation under stress. Understanding cognitive–energetical dynamics helps organizations develop interventions such as breaks, mindfulness training, and task rotation to mitigate fatigue and improve safety [7].

Anxiety and stress-related disorders often involve maladaptive attentional regulation. Therapeutic interventions like cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) aim to reduce maladaptive arousal and improve attentional control through metacognitive restructuring [8].

Emerging technologies like neurofeedback, biofeedback, and wearable EEGs offer new avenues to monitor arousal and cognitive effort in real time. These tools could enhance adaptive self-regulation strategies in high-stress environments. Furthermore, integrating AI and machine learning with cognitive–energetical principles may allow personalized stress management programs [9].

Hockey introduced the idea of compensatory control, where individuals exert extra mental effort to maintain performance under stress. While this mechanism temporarily preserves task efficiency, it comes at the cost of increased fatigue, irritability, and reduced cognitive flexibility. Chronic reliance on compensatory effort can have long-term psychological consequences [10].

Conclusion

The cognitive–energetical framework underscores the delicate balance between cognitive capacity, energetic resources, and environmental demands. Stress disrupts this balance, challenging our attentional systems. Yet, by understanding how effort and arousal interact with task demands, we can develop better strategies for performance, resilience, and well-being. In a world where stress is ubiquitous, cultivating attentional control through this lens is not just academic—it is essential.

References

  1. Cooper PS, Baillet S. Over the rainbow: Guidelines for meaningful use of colour maps in neurophysiology. NeuroImage. 2021;245:118628.

    2. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  2. Ichimiya Y, Mizuguchi S, Motomura Y, et al. Acute-phase electroencephalography for an infantile atypical teratoid/rhabdoid tumor. Clinical Neurol Neurosurgery. 2021;209:106922.

    3. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  3. Saunders B, Inzlicht M. Pooling resources to enhance rigour in psychophysiological research: Insights from open science approaches to meta-analysis. International J Psychophysiol. 2021;162:112-20.

    4. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  4. Mendizabal A, Fan JH. Feasibility and effectiveness appraisal of a neurology residency health equities curriculum. J Neurological Sci. 2021;431:120040.

    5. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  5. Cooper PS, Baillet S. Over the rainbow: Guidelines for meaningful use of colour maps in neurophysiology. NeuroImage. 2021;245:118628.

    6. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  6. Ichimiya Y, Mizuguchi S, Motomura Y, et al. Acute-phase electroencephalography for an infantile atypical teratoid/rhabdoid tumor. Clinical Neurol Neurosurgery. 2021;209:106922.

    7. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  7. Saunders B, Inzlicht M. Pooling resources to enhance rigour in psychophysiological research: Insights from open science approaches to meta-analysis. International J Psychophysiol. 2021;162:112-20.

    8. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  8. Lee JLC. An update on memory reconsolidation updating. Trends in Cognitive 2017; 21(7):531-45.

    9. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  9. McCormick C. Different neural routes to autobiographical memory recall in healthy people and individuals with left medial temporal lobe Neuropsychol. 2018;110:26-36

    10. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  10. Barrett HC, Kurzban R. Modularity in cognition: Framing the debate. Psychological Review. 2006;113(3):628.

    11. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Get the App