Core Studies - Cognitive Psychology - Simons And Chabris Study

Question 1

Inattentional blindness definition

Answer 1

When attention id diverted to another object or task and observers often fail to perceive an unexpected object even if it appears at fixation

Question 2

Aim 1

Answer 2

To find out whether events that are particularly unusual are ore likely to be detected

Question 3

Aim 2

Answer 3

To investigate the effect of difficulty on inattentional attention

Question 4

Aim 3

Answer 4

To investigate the effect of the unusual superimposition and the transparency of characters in the videos used by Neisser

Question 5

Research method

Answer 5

Lab experiments using an independent measures design

Question 6

Number of conditions

Answer 6

16

Question 7

Dependant variable

Answer 7

The number of participants in each of the 16 conditions who noticed the unexpected event

Question 8

Unexpected events

Answer 8

• Gorilla walking across screen
• Woman with an umbrella walking across the screen

Question 9

Examples of standardisation

Answer 9

• Same actors recorded on the same day in the same location
• Each video showed 2 teams, one wearing white shirts and another wearing black shirts
• Players in the videos passed the ball in a standard order
• Each video lasted 75 seconds

Question 10

Sample

Answer 10

• 228 participants in total
• Undergraduate students

Question 11

Sampling method used to gather participants

Answer 11

• Volunteer sampling
• some without payment, some offered large candy bar or were paid a single fee

Question 12

How many p’s had their data discarded

Answer 12

36

Question 13

What materials were used

Answer 13

4 video tapes at 75 seconds long each, each tape showed 2 teams of 3 players, one wearing black and one wearing white.

Question 14

Procedure

Answer 14

• 21 experimenters tested participants and carried out a written protocol so ensure standardisation.
• Participants were told which task they had to complete and which team they had to pay attention to.
• P’s in easy condition were asked to keep a mental note of all the passes their team made
• P’s in hard condition were asked to keep a mental note of the number of aerial passes and the number of bounced passes that their team made
• After the video that
  immediately wrote down their counts and were asked additional questions.

Question 15

What are some examples of the surprise questions

Answer 15

1. While you were doing the counting, did you notice anything unusual about the video?
2. Did you notice anything other than the 6 players?
3. Did you see a gorilla [woman carrying an umbrella] walk across the screen?

Question 16

What happened if p’s answered yes to the surprise questions

Answer 16

They were asked to provide details to control for lying that accompanies social desirability bias

Question 17

Why was the data from 36 participants discarded

Answer 17

• They admitted to having heard of inattentional blindness
• They recorded losing count of the passes
• Passes were incompletely or inaccurately recorded
• Answers could not be clearly interpreted
• Participant’s total pass count was more than three standard deviations away from the mean of the other participants in the condition

Question 18

What was the Key Finding

Answer 18

Across all conditions 54% noticed the unexpected event and 46% failed to notice the unexpected event

Question 19

What was the finding relating to Aim 1

Answer 19

More participants noticed the umbrella woman (65%) than the gorilla (44%)

Question 20

What was the finding relating to Aim 2

Answer 20

More participants noticed the unexpected event in the easy condition (64%) than in the hard condition (45%)

Question 21

What was the finding relating to Aim 3

Answer 21

Participants were more likely to notice the unexpected event in the opaque condition (67%) compared to the transparent condition (42%)

Question 22

What was the finding for the controlled observation

Answer 22

Only 50% noticed the unexpected event

Question 23

Conclusions

Answer 23

1. Observers are more likely to notice unexpected events if these events are visually similar to the events that they are paying attention to
2. The degree of inattentional blindness depends on the difficulty of the primary task, and is more likely when the primary task is hard
3. Inattentional blindness occurs more frequently in cases of superimposition as opposed to live action, but it is still a feature of both
4. Objects can pass through the spatial areas of the attentional focus and still not be ‘seen’ if they are not specifically being attended to

Question 24

Conclusion relating to Aim 1

Answer 24

Observers are more likely to notice unexpected events if these events are visually similar to the events that they are paying attention to

Question 25

Conclusion relating to Aim 2

Answer 25

The degree of inattentional blindness depends on the difficulty of the primary task, and is more likely when the primary task is hard

Question 26

Conclusion relating to Aim 3

Answer 26

Inattentional blindness occurs more frequently in cases of superimposition as opposed to live action, but it is still a feature of both

Question 27

Link to Key Theme

Answer 27

The study shows that situational variables impact our visual attention and can cause inattentional blindness

Question 28

Link to Area

Answer 28

We input information around us such as the video of basketball players in the study. We then process this information as a result of experiences which in this case was the difficulty of the primary task when counting the number of basket ball passes. This therefore results in the behavioural output of inattentional blindness under certain conditions