The Attention Lab

A Field Tool for Evaluating Art's Attention Value

Think of an artwork's "attention value" as how well it attracts, holds, deepens, guides, and lingers in a viewer's mind. You can score that without mysticism or clairvoyance — just eyes, time, and honest observation.

This tool gives you 10 metrics to evaluate any artwork. Whether you're an artist critiquing your own work, a viewer trying to understand why something captivates you, or an educator teaching visual literacy — this rubric makes attention measurable and shareable.

How to Use This Tool

1

Three Timed Passes

  • T0 (0–15s): Entry. What does your eye do first?
  • T1 (1–3 min): Grip & Guidance. Does it steer you or do you meander?
  • T2 (3–7 min): Deepening. Does discovery hold or increase?
2

Score Each Metric

Use a 0–5 scale for each of the 10 metrics below. Be specific and write down evidence for each score.

3

Calculate Total

Add up your scores (max 50). Then convert to a 0–100 index. 35–40+ = strong attention engine.

Sample Scoring

Total Score
39 / 50
Attention Index: 78/100
1

Hook (Entry Pull)

Initial attraction without gimmick; the first 15 seconds of looking.

Score 3 / 5

Scale

0 No pull; stalls immediately.
3 Clear pull without gimmick.
5 Magnetic and specific; device is nameable.

Prompts

  • Where did your eye land first and why?
  • Name the specific device (edge, value jump, scale shock).

Example Evidence

Try scoring an artwork you're looking at right now. What grabbed your attention first?

2

Stickiness (Time-on-Look)

How long attention sustains without boredom.

Score 4 / 5

Scale

0 <30s fatigue
3 ~3 minutes
5 7–10+ minutes without boredom

Prompts

  • How long before you want to step away?

Example Evidence

Does the work hold your attention for minutes, not seconds?

3

Deepening (New Finds/min)

Discovery rate over minutes 1–7; compounding relations.

Score 4 / 5

Scale

0 Stalls after first sweep
3 Steady trickle
5 Compounding relations

Prompts

  • List three new relations you noticed between minutes 3–6.

Example Evidence

Do you keep finding new things the longer you look?

4

Guidance (Compositional Intent)

Steering of the eye via edges/intervals/repeats; diagrammable paths.

Score 3 / 5

Scale

0 Drift; no path
3 Guided loops
5 Deliberate circuits; route is diagrammable

Prompts

  • Sketch the route your eye takes (focal → counterform → rest).

Example Evidence

Does the composition guide your eye deliberately?

5

Coherence (Edge-to-Edge Integrity)

Every inch earns its keep; no dead paint holes.

Score 4 / 5

Scale

0 Dead areas
3 Mostly live with a soft quadrant
5 No passengers end-to-end

Prompts

  • Point to the laziest square inch; why?

Example Evidence

Is every part of the work alive and intentional?

6

Material Necessity

Do ground/scale/reflectance feel required for the effect?

Score 5 / 5

Scale

0 Style pasted on
3 Plausible fit
5 Means feel indispensable

Prompts

  • Name the parameter that would break the effect if changed.

Example Evidence

Would changing the material fundamentally change the work?

7

Embodiment (Viewer Movement)

Does the work train your body—close/far, left/right—because readings unlock?

Score 4 / 5

Scale

0 Static stare only
3 One distance shift
5 Multiple embodied unlocks

Prompts

  • What did moving your body change in the reading?

Example Evidence

Do you need to move around to fully experience it?

8

Afterimage / Afterthought

Persistence of optical/tactile memory after looking away.

Score 5 / 5

Scale

0 Gone in minutes
3 Mental snapshot
5 Tactile/optical memory returns

Prompts

  • Describe what returns unbidden an hour later.

Example Evidence

Does the work stick with you after you leave?

9

Return Impulse (Next-Day)

Desire to revisit; curiosity pressure.

Score 4 / 5

Scale

0 No urge
3 Mild curiosity
5 Reroute your path to see it again

Prompts

  • What unresolved question pulls you back?

Example Evidence

Do you want to see it again tomorrow?

10

Intersubjective Traction

Independent viewers converge on seen features.

Score 3 / 5

Scale

0 No overlap
3 Partial overlap
5 Multiple shared specifics

Prompts

  • Overlap between three viewers' seen facts (A∩B)/ (A∪B).

Example Evidence

Do different people notice the same things?