Simons and Chabris

Simons and Chabris

1. Method

   • Lab experiment
   • Independent Measures
   • 4 IVs; Opaque or Transparent and Gorilla or Umbrella
   • 4 task conditions: White or Black and Easy or Hard
   • 16 individual conditions

2. Aim

   • Confirm that unintentional blindness occurs in realistic, complex situation and that it is sustained for more than 5 seconds

3. Participants

   • 228 Undergraduate students
   • Some received candy or a small payment
   • Some volunteered

4. Procedure

   • Materials
     • 4 video tapes lasting 75 seconds
       • Recorded on SVHS video camera
     • Two teams (black or white shirts) with three players
     • Moved around in front of an elevator door making passes in a standardised order
     • After 45 seconds the unexpected event occurred lasting 5 seconds
       • Gorilla or umbrella women
       • Walked left to right
     • Transparent
       • Filmed separatly and superimposed on eachother
     • Opaque
       • All filmed at the same time
   • Tested individually
   • Told to pay attention to either the white or black team
     • Had to count passes (easy) or number of bounce and aerial passes (hard)
       • Had to immediately write down count
   • Asked 3 questions
     • Did you notice anything unusual
     • Did you notice anything other than the players
     • Did you see a gorilla/umbrella women
     • If they said yes they had to provide details
   • Asked if they'd seen a similar clip before
     • 36 discarded participants

5. Results

   • 46% showed inattentional blindness
   • More people saw the event in the opaque condition (67% vs 42%)
   • Increasing difficulty of task increased inattentional blindness (easy 64% saw vs hard 45%)
   • The effect of task difficulty was higher in the transparent condition
   • Women was seen more than the gorilla
     • Looked more similar to the basket ball players
   • Gorilla seen more in black team condition
     • SImilarity of colour made it easier to spot the unexpected event

6. Conclutions

   • Individuals have a sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events
   • It is not just simply a response to the transparent video
   • More likely to notice events if they are visually similar to the event being payed attention to
   • The level of inattentional blindness depends on the difficulty of the task
   • Objects can pass through the central field of vision and not be seen
   • No conscious perception without attention

7. Evaluation

   • Validity
     • High design validity
       • Standardised
     • Demand Characteristics
       • May have seen video before
     • Concurrent validity
       • Same findings as previous studies
     • Ecological validity
       • Opaque condition increased validity
       • Not realistic responding to filmed situation
   • Reliability
     • Highly standardised
       • Easily replicated to test reliability
     • Inattentional blindness is a reliable idea as it is supported by lots of different evidence
   • Ethics
     • Completely ethical
   • Data
     • Quantitative
       • Easily summarised/analysed
       • Easily compared
       • Can be repeated to establish reliability
   • Sample
     • Student sample
       • Reduced participant variables
       • Quick and cheap
       • Not representative of general population
         • High cognitive ability
         • Only certain people volunteer
     • Large
   • Ethnocentrism
     • No as species specific behaviour
     • Only reflect students cognitive ability
   • Research Method
     • Controlled extraneous variables
       • Highly scientific

8. Links to area/perspective

   • Cognitive
     • Selective attention
     • Inattentional blindness

9. Links to key theme

   • Confirms inattentional blindness in dynamic events
   • Not all information in the visual field is processed
   • Looks at sight rather than hearing
   • Some individuals are more effected than others

10. Links to debates

    • Psychology as a science
      • Fulfills all criteria
    • Individual vs Situational
      • Individual differences in attention
        • Half of participants did see the event
      • Context and situation
        • Black condition was easier
    • Freewill vs determinism
      • Behaviour is determined by cognitive processes which we have no conscious control over