Theories of human cognition generally agree in assuming the existence of a fundamental limit in information processing, but these theories are challenged by findings that appear to circumvent these limitations. We argue that theories are needed that offer a principled account of why the limitations become manifest in some cases but not others.Raffone et al.[1] present a comprehensive theoretical framework that links behavioural effects, such as the attentional blink (AB), visual search and inattentional blindness, to an overarching theory of the neurobiological substrates of consciousness and attention. Central to their model is the global workspace (GW), which is predicated on the notion that working memory, attention and consciousness arise from a network of neurons that can only focus on one representation at any time. This inability to simultaneously process multiple stimuli has been suggested to explain the AB as well as visual search behaviour.However, there is mounting evidence that the brain is capable of encoding multiple items into short-term memory (STM) at once, such as lag-1 sparing, in which two targets are apparently encoded together [2]. Owing to its strictly winner-take-all behaviour, previous GW-based computational accounts of the AB [3,4] had particular difficulty explaining this effect.Raffone et al.[1] respond to this evidence by attempting to reconcile the GW theory with such evidence. The theory of attentional control (TAC) boldly pushes the unitary nature of cognition even further by proposing that STM encoding and attentional selection also time-share central processing capacity, so that only one of them can occur at a time. TAC permits lag-1 sparing through an intermediate buffer that can hold multiple items concurrently, as they await an opportunity to be encoded into STM. Thereby, the AB is not caused by direct competition between target one (T1) and T2, but rather by competition between attentional selection and STM encoding.In this respect, TAC is similar to computational models that we have previously proposed [5][6][7]. In the episodic Simultaneous Type Serial Token model (eSTST), ongoing consolidation has an inhibitory effect on attentional selection. Furthermore, like TAC, we proposed that attention can remain engaged over several consecutive targets to produce spreading of sparing (see [8] and also figure 1).However, the theories differ dramatically in that the eSTST model permits parallel encoding of multiple targets. Furthermore, attentional selection is possible during encoding; it is just reduced in strength. We argue that permissiveness of parallel processing is essential to accommodate the full range of available data concerning the attentional blink. In particular, there are two specific empirical benchmarks that seem unattainable by TAC.