Education Atlas

How Knowledge Is Built
Sign In
Text size
100%
Theme
Learning Theory and Concepts

Automaticity

Behaviorist and Cognitive Processing Theories

Automaticity is the capacity to perform a cognitive task, most studied in education in the context of reading, with speed, accuracy and minimal conscious attention, freeing a learner's limited cognitive resources for higher-level work such as comprehension. The concept was developed into a formal theory of reading by psychologists David LaBerge and S. Jay Samuels in a 1974 paper, which proposed that a reader must move word recognition from a slow, effortful, attention-demanding process to a fast, automatic one before they can devote meaningful attention to understanding what a text means, since attention is a limited resource that cannot be fully allocated to both decoding and comprehension at once. LaBerge and Samuels's automaticity theory became a foundational argument for repeated and fluency-focused reading practice in literacy instruction, on the reasoning that a student still consciously sounding out individual words has little cognitive capacity left over to follow the meaning of a sentence, and the theory remains a standard reference point in reading research on the relationship between decoding fluency and comprehension.

Facts
Core Claim
Automaticity is the ability to perform a task or exhibit a behavior without occupying conscious attention with its low level details, typically the result of learning, repetition and practice, so that the behavior becomes an automatic response pattern or habit. 1
Origin Year
1974 1
Sources
1. Automaticity (Wikipedia)
Wikipedia
  • Opening paragraph, first two sentences
    automaticity is the ability to do things without occupying the mind with the low-level details required, allowing it to become an automatic response pattern or habit. It is usually the result of learning, repetition, and practice.
  • In reading section, first sentence
    LaBerge and Samuels (1974) helped explain how reading fluency develops.
View the Source
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.