Attention is a scarce, metabolically expensive resource. Working memory holds only a few items at once, and every element on a screen draws down a finite budget (Cognitive Load Theory). The Attention Ledger treats each touchpoint as an account of credits — attention spent on the goal — and debits — attention spent on friction and overhead.
Figure N1 — Salience × Load, and the resulting ledgercaptured · contested · lost
State 01
Captured
The goal element is high-salience at the right moment and costs little to process. Attention is paying its rent.
DoProtect it. Add nothing that competes.
State 02
Contested
Salience is split across competing elements — the decisive moment shares the stage with second-order calls to action.
DoDemote or remove the competitors.
State 03
Lost
The goal element is buried, or the screen's load is higher than the moment allows. The account is overdrawn — attention debt.
DoPay down load before adding salience.
The science — Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller) sets the finite budget; bottom-up salience versus top-down goals explains why the wrong element wins; Hick's Law says options cost time non-linearly; the von Restorff (isolation) effect says distinctive elements are remembered. The Ledger operationalizes all four into a per-touchpoint score.
Outcome · 01
Salience × Load
every element scored on two axes, so cuts and additions are evidence-based, not aesthetic.
Outcome · 02
Debt paid down
cognitive overhead on the path to the decisive moment is identified and removed first.
Outcome · 03
Conversion
attention reallocated to the goal element lifts activation and conversion without new features.