Automaticity, Resources, and Memory: Theoretical Controversies and Practical Implications

Abstract

This article describes a theoretical controversy over the nature of automaticity and suggests implications of the controversy for the design of training programs. One side of the controversy describes automaticity in terms of processing resources, in that automatic processes require little or no resources. The other side describes automaticity as a memory phenomenon dependent on direct-access, single-step retrieval from memory. The two sides differ in their ability to account for four basic questions about automaticity: (1) why automatic processing has the properties it does; (2) how automaticity is learned; (3) how the properties of automaticity emerge with practice, and (4) why consistency of practice is so important to the development of automaticity. The memory view provides better answers than the resource view, particularly for questions about training. Training is an important practical issue, and implications of the memory view for training are spelled out in some detail.