Failures to see: attentive blank stares revealed by change blindness

Change blindness illustrates a remarkable limitation in visual processing by demonstrating that substantial changes in a visual scene can go undetected. Because these changes can ultimately be detected using top-down driven search processes, many theories assign a central role to spatial attention in overcoming change blindness. Surprisingly, it has been reported that change blindness can occur during blink-contingent changes even when observers fixate the changing location [O'Regan, J. K., Deubel, H., Clark, J. J., & Rensink, R. A. (2000). Picture changes during blinks: Looking without seeing and seeing without looking. Visual Cognition, 7, 191-212]. However, eye blinks produce a transient disruption of vision that is independent of any associated changes in the retinal image. We determined whether these 'attentive blank stares' could occur in the absence of blink-mediated visual suppression. Using a flicker change-blindness paradigm we confirm that despite direct attentive fixations, obvious scene changes often remain undetected. We conclude that change detection involves object or feature based attentional mechanisms, which can be 'misdirected' despite the allocation of spatial attention to the position of the change.     

Change blindness in the absence of a visual disruption

Findings from studies of visual memory and change detection have revealed a surprising inability to detect large changes to scenes from one view to the next ('change blindness'). When some form of disruption is introduced between an original and modified display, observers often fail to notice the change. This disruption can take many forms (e.g. an eye movement, a flashed blank screen, a blink, a cut in a motion picture, etc) with similar results. In all cases, the changes are sufficiently large that, were they to occur instantaneously, they would consistently be detected. Prior research on change blindness was predicated on the assumption that, in the absence of a visual disruption, the signal caused by the change would draw attention, leading to detection. In two experiments, we demonstrate that change blindness can occur even in the absence of a visual disruption. In one experiment, subjects actually detected more changes with a disruption than without one. When changes are sufficiently gradual, the visible change signal does not seem to draw attention, and large changes can go undetected. The findings are discussed in the context of metacognitive beliefs about change detection and the strategic decisions those beliefs entail.     

Do "mudsplashes" induce tactile change blindness?

The phenomenon of change blindness (the surprising inability of people to correctly perceive changes between consecutively presented displays), primarily reported in vision, has recently been shown to occur for positional changes presented in tactile displays as well. Here, we studied people's ability to detect changes in the number of tactile stimuli in successively presented displays composed of one to three stimuli distributed over the body surface. In Experiment 1, a tactile mask consisting of the simultaneous activation of all seven possible tactile stimulators was sometimes presented between the two to-be-discriminated tactile displays. In Experiment 2, a "mudsplash" paradigm was used, with a brief irrelevant tactile distractor presented at the moment of change of the tactile display. Change blindness was demonstrated in both experiments, thus showing that the failure to detect tactile change is not necessarily related to (1) the physical disruption between consecutive events, (2) the effect of masking covering the location of the change, or (3) the erasure or resetting of the information contained within an internal representation of the tactile display. These results are interpreted in terms of a limitation in the number of spatial locations/events that can be consciously accessed at any one time. This limitation appears to constrain change-detection performance, no matter the sensory modality in which the stimuli are presented.     

Do “mudsplashes” induce tactile change blindness?

The phenomenon of change blindness (the surprising inability of people to correctly perceive changes between consecutively presented displays), primarily reported in vision, has recently been shown to occur for positional changes presented in tactile displays as well. Here, we studied people’s ability to detect changes in the number of tactile stimuli in successively presented displays composed of one to three stimuli distributed over the body surface. In Experiment 1, a tactile mask consisting of the simultaneous activation of all seven possible tactile stimulators was sometimes presented between the two to-be-discriminated tactile displays. In Experiment 2, a “mudsplash” paradigm was used, with a brief irrelevant tactile distractor presented at the moment of change of the tactile display. Change blindness was demonstrated in both experiments, thus showing that the failure to detect tactile change is not necessarily related to (1) the physical disruption between consecutive events, (2) the effect of masking covering the location of the change, or (3) the erasure or resetting of the information contained within an internal representation of the tactile display. These results are interpreted in terms of a limitation in the number of spatial locations/events that can be consciously accessed at any one time. This limitation appears to constrain change-detection performance, no matter the sensory modality in which the stimuli are presented.     

Word learning is 'smart': evidence that conceptual information affects preschoolers' extension of novel words

We examined electrophysiological correlates of conscious change detection versus change blindness for equivalent displays. Observers had to detect any changes, across a visual interruption, between a pair of successive displays. Each display comprised grey circles on a background of alternate black and white stripes. Foreground changes arose when light-grey circles turned dark-grey and vice-versa. Physically stronger background changes arose when all black stripes turned white and vice-versa. Despite their physical strength, background changes were undetected unless attention was directed to them, whereas foreground changes were invariably seen. Event-related potentials revealed that the P300 component was suppressed for unseen background changes, as compared with the same changes when seen. This effect arose first over frontal sites, and then spread to parietal sites. These results extend recent fMRI findings that fronto-parietal activation is associated with conscious visual change detection, to reveal the timing of these neural correlates.     

Metacognition and change detection: do lab and life really converge?

Studies of change blindness indicate that more intentional monitoring of changes is necessary to successfully detect changes as scene complexity increases. However, there have been conflicting reports as to whether people are aware of this relation between intention and successful change detection as scene complexity increases. Here we continue our dialogue with [Beck, M. R., Levin, D. T., & Angelone, B. (2007a). Change blindness blindness: Beliefs about the roles of intention and scene complexity in change detection. Consciousness and Cognition, 16, 31-51; Beck, M. R., Levin, D. T., & Angelone, B. (2007b). Metacognitive errors in change detection: Lab and life converge. Consciousness and Cognition, 16, 58-62] by reporting two experiments that show participants do in fact intuit that more intentional monitoring is needed to detect changes as scene complexity increases. We also discuss how this dialogue illustrates the need for psychological studies to be grounded in measurements taken from real world situations rather than laboratory experiments or questionnaires.     

Crossmodal change blindness between vision and touch

Change blindness is the name given to people's inability to detect changes introduced between two consecutively-presented scenes when they are separated by a distractor that masks the transients that are typically associated with change. Change blindness has been reported within vision, audition, and touch, but has never before been investigated when successive patterns are presented to different sensory modalities. In the study reported here, we investigated change detection performance when the two to-be-compared stimulus patterns were presented in the same sensory modality (i.e., both visual or both tactile) and when one stimulus pattern was tactile while the other was presented visually or vice versa. The two to-be-compared patterns were presented consecutively, separated by an empty interval, or else separated by a masked interval. In the latter case, the masked interval could either be tactile or visual. The first experiment investigated visual-tactile and tactile-visual change detection performance. The results showed that in the absence of masking, participants detected changes in position accurately, despite the fact that the two to-be-compared displays were presented in different sensory modalities. Furthermore, when a mask was presented between the two to-be-compared displays, crossmodal change blindness was elicited no matter whether the mask was visual or tactile. The results of two further experiments showed that performance was better overall in the unimodal (visual or tactile) conditions than in the crossmodal conditions. These results suggest that certain of the processes underlying change blindness are multisensory in nature. We discuss these findings in relation to recent claims regarding the crossmodal nature of spatial attention.     

Pigeons (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Columba livia</Emphasis>) show change blindness in a color-change detection task

Change blindness is a phenomenon whereby changes to a stimulus are more likely go unnoticed under certain circumstances. Pigeons learned a change detection task, in which they observed sequential stimulus displays consisting of individual colors back-projected onto three response keys. The color of one response key changed during each sequence and pecks to the key that displayed the change were reinforced. Pigeons showed a change blindness effect, in that change detection accuracy was worse when there was an inter-stimulus interval interrupting the transition between consecutive stimulus displays. Birds successfully transferred to stimulus displays involving novel colors, indicating that pigeons learned a general change detection rule. Furthermore, analysis of responses to specific color combinations showed that pigeons could detect changes involving both spectral and non-spectral colors and that accuracy was better for changes involving greater differences in wavelength. These results build upon previous investigations of change blindness in both humans and pigeons and suggest that change blindness may be a general consequence of selective visual attention relevant to multiple species and stimulus dimensions.     

Nothing compares 2 views: change blindness can occur despite preserved access to the changed information

Change blindness, the failure to detect visual changes that occur during a disruption, has increasingly been used to infer the nature of internal representations. If every change were detected, detailed representations of the world would have to be stored and accessible. However, because many changes are not detected, visual representations might not be complete, and access to them might be limited. Using change detection to infer the completeness of visual representations requires an understanding of the reasons for change blindness. This article provides empirical support for one such reason: change blindness resulting from the failure to compare retained representations of both the pre- and postchange information. Even when unaware of changes, observers still retained information about both the pre- and postchange objects on the same trial.     

‘This Is the Person You Selected’: Eyewitnesses' Blindness for Their Own Facial Recognition Decisions

The aim of the current research was to identify conditions under which choice blindness in facial recognition decisions occurs. In five experiments, participants watched four mock‐crime videos and made choices that were either evaluative (Experiment 1) or absolute in nature (Experiments 2a–c and 3). When participants were subsequently asked to motivate their choice, they were sometimes presented with choices they had not made. For evaluative decisions, concurrent (27%) and retrospective blindness rates (21%) were relatively low compared with previous studies. For absolute decisions, choice‐blindness rates varied, depending on when exposure to the manipulated outcome took place (immediate: concurrent 32–35%, retrospective 0–6% [Experiments 2a–c]; 48 hours' delay: concurrent 68%, retrospective 39% [Experiment 3]). We argue that blindness for facial recognition decisions is more likely for evaluative decisions and for longer intervals between decision and manipulation and also for conditions of increased task complexity, which we interpret in terms of ambiguity. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Shuffling your way out of change blindness

Change detection is typically discussed in the literature as a 2-state phenomenon. Small differences between otherwise identical images are easy to detect when the images are superimposed in space and alternated in time (“shuffled”). However, change blindness results from any disruption that prevents the critical change from generating the sole salient transient. Here we show that different presentation strategies produce different degrees of change blindness for the same change. Specifically, shuffling the images supports faster change detection than viewing the same 2 images side by side, even when the images contain a number of distracting differences. In Experiment 1, pairs of photographs having a 50 % chance of containing a difference were viewed either in alternation, in a “Shuffle” condition, or simultaneously, in a “Side-by-Side” condition. Change detection was about 6 seconds faster when the images were viewed in the “Shuffle” mode. In Experiment 2, we presented two images that were slightly laterally shifted relative to each other (0–48 pixels). The RT benefit for the Shuffle viewing mode was very strong when the relative shift was small, to insignificant when there was a large difference between the two images. However, at large shifts, Shuffle maintained an accuracy advantage. It seems that changes are easier to detect when comparing images in a Shuffle condition rather than Side-by-Side. This has important implications for real world tasks like radiology where detection of change is critical.     

Lost in the move? Secondary task performance impairs tactile change detection on the body

Change blindness, the surprising inability of people to detect significant changes between consecutively-presented visual displays, has recently been shown to affect tactile perception as well. Visual change blindness has been observed during saccades and eye blinks, conditions under which people’s awareness of visual information is temporarily suppressed. In the present study, we demonstrate change blindness for suprathreshold tactile stimuli resulting from the execution of a secondary task requiring bodily movement. In Experiment 1, the ability of participants to detect changes between two sequentially-presented vibrotactile patterns delivered on their arms and legs was compared while they performed a secondary task consisting of either the execution of a movement with the right arm toward a visual target or the verbal identification of the target side. The results demonstrated that a motor response gave rise to the largest drop in perceptual sensitivity (as measured by changes in d′) in detecting changes to the tactile display. In Experiment 2, we replicated these results under conditions in which the participants had to detect tactile changes while turning a steering wheel instead. These findings are discussed in terms of the role played by bodily movements, sensory suppression, and higher order information processing in modulating people’s awareness of tactile information across the body surface.     

驾驶员在交通场景中的变化视盲及其启示

变化视盲(change blindness)现象,也称变化盲,是指视觉情景中人们不能觉察到某个事物变化的现象。研究以驾驶员为主体探讨了道路交通领域中的变化视盲现象。首先,从场景变化特征和驾驶员特征两个方面综述了影响驾驶员变化视盲的影响因素;其次,结合影响因素与变化视盲的特征理论建立了驾驶员变化检测的认知过程模型;最后,在模型的基础上,讨论了提高驾驶员变化检测能力的实际意义和潜在措施,并对未来有关交通安全变化视盲的研究予以展望。     

The perception of changing emotion expressions

The utility of recognising emotion expressions for coordinating social interactions is well documented, but less is known about how continuously changing emotion displays are perceived. The nonlinear dynamic systems view of emotions suggests that mixed emotion expressions in the middle of displays of changing expressions may be decoded differently depending on the expression origin. Hysteresis is when an impression (e.g., disgust) persists well after changes in facial expressions that favour an alternative impression (e.g., anger). In expression changes based on photographs (Study 1) and avatar images (Studies 2a-c, 3), we found hystereses particularly in changes between emotions that are perceptually similar (e.g., anger-disgust). We also consistently found uncertainty (neither emotion contributing to the mixed expression was perceived), which was more prevalent in expression sequences than in static images. Uncertainty occurred particularly in changes between emotions that are perceptually dissimilar, such as changes between happiness and negative emotions. This suggests that the perceptual similarity of emotion expressions may determine the extent to which hysteresis and uncertainty occur. Both hysteresis and uncertainty effects support our premise that emotion decoding is state dependent, a characteristic of dynamic systems. We propose avenues to test possible underlying mechanisms.     

变化盲视的最新研究进展

变化盲视指观察者不能探测到客体或情境中的变化 ,是近十年以来认知心理学的研究热点之一。变化盲视可发生在各种实验条件下。例如 ,在扫视、眨眼、电影镜头切换时发生的变化以及真实情景的交互作用中发生的变化 ,观察者都有可能探测不到。本文介绍了近年来对于变化盲视的研究成果 ,包括经常使用的实验范式和对这个现象的解释等     

Oscillatory motion induces change blindness

Change blindness is the relative inability of normally sighted observers to detect large changes in scenes when the low-level signals associated with those changes are either masked or of extremely low magnitude. Change detection can be inhibited by saccadic eye movements, artificial saccades or blinks, and 'mud splashes'. We now show that change detection is also inhibited by whole image motion in the form of sinusoidal oscillations. The degree of disruption depends upon the frequency of oscillation, which at 3 Hz is equivalent to that produced by artificial blinks. Image motion causes the retinal image to be blurred and this is known to affect object recognition. However, our results are inconsistent with good change detection followed by a delay due to poor recognition of the changing object. Oscillatory motion can induce eye movements that potentially mask or inhibit the low-level signals related to changes in the scene, but we show that eye movements promote rather than inhibit change detection when the image is moving.     

内隐觉察的行为和神经活动特征

变化盲视是指在某些条件下人们往往觉察不到视觉场景中实质性的改变。最近研究表明,变化盲视发生时个体虽然不能有意识地报告变化,但却能无意识地对变化刺激进行加工和反应,也就是产生了内隐觉察。内隐觉察能够引导注意、影响反应速度。与觉察和无觉察相比,内隐觉察的眼动模式具有鲜明的特征。与无变化试次相比,盲视试次可以观察到显著的脑电活动变化以及不同的脑区激活。内隐觉察的研究虽然取得了丰富的成果,但也还存在着一些需要明确和解决的问题,如左侧前额叶在内隐觉察中的作用,以及如何将没有视觉干扰的范式应用到变化觉察的神经活动测量中等。     

Preferential processing of threatening facial expressions using the repetition blindness paradigm

Background: Neuroanatomical evidence suggests that the human brain has dedicated pathways to rapidly process threatening stimuli. This processing bias for threat was examined using the repetition blindness (RB) paradigm. RB (i.e., failure to report the second instance of an identical stimulus rapidly following the first) has been established for words, objects and faces but not, to date, facial expressions. Methods: 78 (Study 1) and 62 (Study 2) participants identified repeated and different, threatening and non-threatening emotional facial expressions in rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) streams. Results: In Study 1, repeated facial expressions produced more RB than different expressions. RB was attenuated for threatening expressions. In Study 2, attenuation of RB for threatening expressions was replicated. Additionally, semantically related but non-identical threatening expressions reduced RB relative to non-threatening stimuli. Conclusions: These findings suggest that the threat bias is apparent in the temporal processing of facial expressions, and expands the RB paradigm by demonstrating that identical facial expressions are susceptible to the effect.