Simon And Chabris Flashcards
What year was Simon and Chabris study?
1999
What is inattentional blindness?
When people fail to see something (even if it is in their field of visions/precisely where they are looking) as they are paying attention to something else
Who originally investigated inattentional blindness and when?
Neisser in the 1970s
What was Neisser’s study?
Participants were shown a video where two teams of players passed basketballs between them
A woman carrying an umbrella walked across the screen in front of them
What were Neisser’s results?
22/28 participants failed to see the woman carrying the umbrella
How long did the lady walk across the screen for in Neisser’s study.
4 seconds
How was Neisser’s video made?
By overlaying three separately filmed videos in top of each other
Black shirt team passing
White shirt team passing
A woman carrying an umbrella walking across the screen
Created a ghostly/transparent effect
What were the aims of Simon and Chabris study?
~ Investigate whether results from Neisser’s research were affected by the way he made his video (transparent effect) or whether the same results would be obtained from a more true-to-life opaque video (two teams + unexpected event were all filmed together)
~ Also wanted to investigate effect of other factors:
Nature of the unexpected event
What the participants were told to do
Difficulty of the task participants were given to do during the video
What were the characteristics of Simon and Chabris sample?
~ 228 participants
~ Almost all undergraduate students at Harvard University in USA
~ Data from 36 of these was not analysed e.g. due to being aware of the concept of inattentional blindness
~ Results were based on data from a sample of 192 participants
~ 12 per condition
What was the procedure of Simon and Chabris study?
~ Participants all watched a 75 second video
~ They were then asked questions about what they had seen
~ Participants were in one of 16 conditions based on the manipulation of four independent variables
What were the four independent variables in Simon and Chabris study?
~ Opaque or transparent video
~ Unexpected event: woman carrying an umbrella or a woman wearing a gorilla costume (both walked across the screen from left to right and were in sight for 5 seconds)
~ Task of counting the basketball passes of either: team wearing black shirts or team wearing white shirts
~ Given easy task (count number of passes made by their team) or a hard task (count number of aerial passes and the number of bounces made by their team)
How many conditions were there in Simon and Chabris study?
16
What percentage of the time did Simon and Chabris participants notice the unexpected event?
54%
What percentage of the time did Simon and Chabris participants not notice the unexpected event?
46%
What were Simon and Chabris results for the video appearance variable?
Opaque - 65.5% saw the unexpected event
Transparent - 41.6% saw the unexpected event
What were Simon and Chabris results for the event variable?
Woman with umbrella - 65.5% saw the unexpected event
Gorilla - 42.6% saw the unexpected event
What were Simon and Chabris results for the similarity of task variable?
Black team - 67% saw the unexpected event
White team - 8% saw the unexpected event
What were Simon and Chabris results for the difficulty of task variable?
Easy - 63.5% saw the unexpected event
Difficult- 44.6% saw the unexpected event
What were the conclusions of Simon and Chabris study?
~ Study shows paying attention to one task may result in people failing to see an unexpected event nearly half of the time (even when it is right in front of them and lasts for a sustained period of time)
~ This provides further evidence for sustained inattentional blindness
What two things can be commented on about Simon and Chabris study?
External reliability
Population validity
How is the external reliability of Simon and Chabris study?
It has a large sample size which is enough to establish a consistent effect
However the number in each condition (12) is not enough to establish a consistent effect
What debates does Simon and Chabris link to?
Usefulness
Holism
Determinism
How does Simon and Chabris study link to the usefulness debate?
~ Findings can be used to aid the attention of students
~ Done by altering the task and stimuli presented to them
How is the population validity in Simon and Chabris study?
~ Sample was mainly Harvard students so not very generalisable to other groups
~ E.g older people may have lower attention levels
How does Simon and Chabris study link to the Holism vs Reductionalism debate?
~ Hollistic
~ Investigated multiple factors influencing attention:
-Task similarity
- Task difficulty
- Video transparency
- Unexpected event itself
How does Simon and Chabris study link to the Determinism vs Free will debate?
~ Determinism
~ Attention of the participants was determined by the task and video presented to them
What are the similarities between Moray’s study and Simon and Chabris study?
~ Both included deception
~ Both were lab experiments
~ Both had students within their sample
What are the differences between Moray’s study and Simon and Chabris study?
~ Different experimental designs
~ Different types of attention being studied
How has Simon and Chabris study changed our understanding of attention compared to Moray’s?
~ Tells us about a new type of attention (visual vs auditory)
~ Tells us about how you might miss something rather than notice it
Why has Simon and Chabris study not changed our understanding of attention compared to Moray’s?
It tells us the same thing: if we are focused on one thing we are likely to miss something else
Why has Simon and Chabris study not changed our understanding of individual diversity compare to Moray’s?
Both showed individual differences in attention but did not investigate why this was the case
Why has Simon and Chabris study not changed our understanding of social diversity compare to Moray’s?
They both were carried out on similar types of people (Oxford/Harvard students)
How has Simon and Chabris study changed our understanding of cultural diversity compare to Moray’s?
Simon and Chabris studied in the US while Moray studied in the UK
Why has Simon and Chabris study not changed our understanding of cultural diversity compare to Moray’s?
They both found similar results so there seems to be no cultural differences
