Cognitive area: Simons and Chabris

Question 1

What was the key theme of Simons and Chabris’ research?

Answer 1

Visual inattention

Question 2

What is inattentional blindness?

Answer 2

The failure to see an event or object in your field of vision because you are so focussed on other elements of what you can see

Question 3

What two types of research do S and C refer to that have previously investigated inattentional blindness?

Answer 3

Computer based dynamic displays and video based dynamic events

Question 4

What are computer based dynamic displays?

Answer 4

A visual equivalent to Moray’s work, P’s were asked to judge line lengths that made up crosses and data was collected on whether P’s would miss ‘unexpected events’ such as a smiley face

Question 5

Who conducted the computer based dynamic display research?

Answer 5

Mack and Rock

Question 6

What are video based dynamic events?

Answer 6

Known as ‘selective looking’, research investigated inattentional blindness using a more realistic event (a basketball match between 6 players) which were superimposed on each other and data was collected on whether P’s would notice a woman walking through the match with an umbrella

Question 7

Who conducted the previous research on inattentional blindness whereby a video based dynamic event was used?

Answer 7

Neisser

Question 8

Why did Mack and Rock and Neisser’s studies lack ecological validity?

Answer 8

Because people do not normally judge the lengths of lines in everyday life and because the videos were superimposed on each other

Question 9

How/why was Neisser’s ask an example of sustained inattentional blindness?

Answer 9

Because the unexpected event was 4 seconds long

Question 10

What did Simons and Chabris want to confirm with their research?

Answer 10

That inattentional blindness occurs in a realistic complex situation (ie where the unexpected event lasts for 5 seconds or more, but is nonetheless unnoticed by observers)

Question 11

What other 4 variables did S and C want to test?

Answer 11

Whether colour of unexpected event would have an effect on inattentional blindness
Whether a particularly unusual event would be detected
Whether a more difficult task would increase inattentional blindness
Whether a more realistic video would give different findings to Neisser’s research

Question 12

What research method did S and C use?

Answer 12

Lab experiment

Question 13

What experimental design did S and C use and justify this

Answer 13

Independent measures as each P was only tested in 1 condition

Question 14

Describe the sample

Answer 14

228 P’s, almost all of whom were students

Question 15

What rewards were P’s offered for taking part?

Answer 15

A single payment or a large candy bar

Question 16

Describe some of the controls used in each of the video clips

Answer 16

Same actors, time of day and location
2 teams of 3 players
Standard basketball

Question 17

What was the standard pass order of the ball?

Answer 17

1 > 2 > 3

Question 18

What was the size of the area used for the video clips?

Answer 18

3 x 5m

Question 19

At what time in the video did the unexpected event occur?

Answer 19

Between 44 and 48 seconds

Question 20

What were the 4 IV’s?

Answer 20

The construction of the video, what the P’s focussed on, difficulty of task and the unexpected event that occurred

Question 21

What were the 2 conditions for the construction of the video?

Answer 21

Transparent or opaque

Question 22

What were the 2 conditions for what the P’s focussed on?

Answer 22

Black or white

Question 23

What were the 2 conditions for the difficulty of the task?

Answer 23

Easy or hard

Question 24

What were the 2 conditions for the unexpected event that occurred?

Answer 24

Umbrella woman or gorilla

Question 25

Were the participants tested individually or in groups?

Answer 25

Individually

Question 26

What instructions were P’s given before viewing the clip?

Answer 26

Pay attention to either the white or black team

Question 27

Whilst watching the video how did P’s keep score of the passes?

Answer 27

They took a mental note

Question 28

What were P’s asked to count in the hard task?

Answer 28

The number of aerial and bounce passes

Question 29

What were the 3 questions P’s were asked after watching the clip?

Answer 29

i) While you were doing the counting, did you notice anything unusual in the video?
ii) Did you notice anything other than the 6 players?
iii) Did you see a gorilla/woman carrying an umbrella walk across the screen?

Question 30

If P’s answered ‘yes’ to any of the follow up questions, what were they asked to do?

Answer 30

To provide details of what they had seen

Question 31

What happened to the questions if P’s mentioned the unexpected event at any point?

Answer 31

The rest of the questions weren’t asked

Question 32

How did researchers stick to ethical guidelines at the end of the procedure?

Answer 32

P’s were given a full debrief

Question 33

What was the overall level of inattentional blindness?

Answer 33

46%

Question 34

Why was data from 36 P’s removed from the set?

Answer 34

They had seen a similar video before
They had lost count
They had made an inaccurate count of passes

Question 35

From the results, how could it be explained that P’s were more likely to notice the unexpected event while watching the opaque video?

Answer 35

Because the opaque video was more realistic than the transparent video

Question 36

Were P’s more likely to notice the unexpected event when the task was easy or hard and why?

Answer 36

More likely to notice the event in the easy task because it required less focus

Question 37

Were P’s more likely to notice the umbrella woman or the gorilla?

Answer 37

More likely to notice the umbrella woman as the umbrella made her taller than the other players and was more unusual

Question 38

Did S and C adhere to ethical guidelines?

Answer 38

Yes

Question 39

Was the procedure standardised and replicable (internal reliability)?

Answer 39

Yes - high level controls (e.g. time of unexpected event, same location, standard pass order)

Question 40

Was the sample large enough to suggest a consistent effect (external reliability)?

Answer 40

Yes - 192 is a good sample size which showed consistency for inattentional blindness

Question 41

Was it an accurate test of inattentional blindness? (construct validity)

Answer 41

Was a highly controlled lab experiment so there may have been potential demand characteristics

Question 42

Can the sample be generalised from? (population validity)

Answer 42

Not necessarily - only undergrad students and all had volunteered

Question 43

Was the scenario true to life? (ecological validity)

Answer 43

The actual event lacks ecological validity however, the use of an opaque video makes it more valid

Question 44

Why can S and C’s results be argued to have high concurrent validity?

Answer 44

Because the results concur with Neisser’s study

Question 45

In what way can S and C’s study be argued to be ethnocentric?

Answer 45

All P’s were American students, however, we all have the same brain structure so we would expect the same results in other cultures

Question 46

What did S and C conclude?

Answer 46

That objects can pass through our central field of vision and still not be seen if they are not specifically attended to