The Social Spotlight Increases Blindness to Change Blindness

The results of research on change blindness and the spotlight effect suggest that (a) others are unlikely to notice changes in our appearance and (b) we are likely to overestimate the extent to which others notice changes in our appearance. However, little research has directly addressed the latter possibility. In Study 1, target persons overestimated the extent to which observers noticed a change in their sweatshirt. In Study 2, observers who followed the target persons throughout the study overestimated the extent to which other observers noticed the change in the target persons' sweatshirt, but target persons' overestimations were significantly higher. The results suggest that the spotlight effect increases blindness to change blindness.     

Current Approaches to Change Blindness

Across saccades, blinks, blank screens, movie cuts, and other interruptions, observers fail to detect substantial changes to the visual details of objects and scenes. This inability to spot changes (“change blindness”) is the focus of this special issue of Visual Cognition. This introductory paper briefly reviews recent studies of change blindness, noting the relation of these findings to earlier research and discussing the inferences we can draw from them. Most explanations of change blindness assume that we fail to detect changes because the changed display masks or overwrites the initial display. Here I draw a distinction between intentional and incidental change detection tasks and consider how alternatives to the “overwriting” explanation may provide better explanations for change blindness.     

Intentionalism and Change Blindness

According to reductive intentionalism, the phenomenal character of a conscious experience is constituted by the experience's intentional (or representational) content. In this article I attempt to show that a phenomenon in visual perception called change blindness poses a problem for this doctrine. Specifically, I argue that phenomenal character is not sensitive, as it should be if reductive intentionalism is correct, to fine-grained variations in content. The standard anti-intentionalist strategy is to adduce putative cases in which phenomenal character varies despite sameness of content. This paper explores an alternative antiintentionalist tack, arguing, by way of a specific example involving change blindness, that content can vary despite sameness of phenomenal character.

Change Blindness and Eyewitness Testimony

The authors explored the relevance of research on change blindness to eyewitness identification and testimony under intentional and incidental memory conditions. Participants (N = 80, 40 men and 40 women) viewed a video enactment of a burglary in which the identity of the burglar changed at the halfway point of the film. Half of participants were briefed to remember the content, and the other half were not. All were tested for the recall of the content, awareness of the change, and ability to identify either or both of the burglars. Some 61% of participants did not notice the identity change. Rates of detection were significantly higher in participants in the intentional condition, who also recalled significantly more detail from the film. Awareness of change was also significantly related to content recall scores and accuracy of identification of both burglars. The results illustrate the interrelation between the eyewitness and change blindness literatures.     

Change Blindness Blindness: The Metacognitive Error of Overestimating Change-detection Ability

Recent research has demonstrated that subjects fail to detect large between-view changes to natural and artificial scenes. Yet, most people (including psychologists) believe that they would detect the changes. We report two experiments documenting this metacognitive error. In Experiment 1, students in a large General Psychology class were asked if they thought they would notice the change in four different situations previously tested by Levin and Simons (1997) and Simons and Levin (1998). Most claimed that they would have noticed even relatively small changes that real observers rarely detected. In Experiment 2, subjects were tested individually and half were asked to predict whether someone else would detect the changes. Subjects again overestimated the degree to which changes would be detected, both by themselves and by others. We discuss possible reasons for these metacognitive errors including distorted beliefs about visual experience, change, and stability.     

刺激的编码效力对重复知盲的影响

通过改变目标刺激和非目标刺激的编码效力, 探讨重复知盲发生的机制。采用RSVP任务, 操作目标的重复性与目标的性质(实验1a和实验2)、位置(实验1b)和非目标的字频(实验2), 对比不同条件下第二个重复刺激的正确报告率。结果是：(1)非目标为字母、目标是字母时的重复知盲大于目标为电脑符号时的重复知盲。(2)非目标为字母、目标为电脑符号时, 目标在1和3位置时出现了重复知盲, 而在2和4位置时没有出现重复知盲。(3)当非目标为高频汉字、目标也是高频汉字时的重复知盲大于目标为符号时的重复知盲。(4)当目标为高频汉字、非目标是高频汉字时出现了重复知盲, 而非目标是低频汉字时重复知盲消失。实验结果表明, 字母和汉字条件下, 目标刺激和非目标刺激的编码效力都会对重复知盲产生影响, 支持竞争假设。     

注意定势和刺激特征对无意视盲的影响

研究采用动态无意视盲范式,呈现3个2×2的被试间实验,考察注意定势和刺激特征对无意视盲的影响.研究结果显示,非预期刺激与注意项目的特征显著性独立于注意定势,非预期刺激与注意项目的特征相似性则基于注意定势.显著的刺激容易被觉察,但它不会总是自动地捕获注意,最重要的影响因素是观察者的注意定势.     

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     

变化知觉的另一面——变化盲

人们经常会探测不到事物的变化,这种现象被称为变化盲（change blindness）,它和变化觉察是变化知觉的两个面。对变化盲的研究主要集中以下几个方面：对变化盲现象产生的原因辨析以及从刺激属性和注意广度、知识经验、个体差异、文化背景等分析变化盲的影响因素;近几年来内隐变化觉察也引起研究者的争论和重视;此外,对变化盲的多（跨）通道和错误元认知研究也成为一种新的研究动向。同时,变化盲研究在其表征机制、加工方式以及内隐变化觉察等方面尚存在争议,变化盲的错误元认知研究以及变化盲的认知神经心理研究则是此领域的薄弱环节。     

刺激类型及表征关系对无意视盲的影响

通过考察刺激类型以及重叠呈现的图片流和词语流的表征关系对非注意刺激的捕获差异,试图考察刺激类型和表征关系对无意视盲（Inattentional Blindness）的影响。分别有20名中学生参加了词和图片基线水平测试,52名中学生参与了无意视盲实验。研究结果表明：（1）当词与图片重叠呈现时,不管注意刺激是词还是图片,也不管词与图片的表征是否一致,与基线水平相比,被试都出现了显著的无意视盲现象。（2）当词与图片的表征意义一致时,如果注意刺激是图片,而非注意刺激是词,那么被试更容易觉察到非注意刺激。（3）非注意刺激与注意刺激表征意义一致时更容易捕获观察者的注意     

Exploring the informational sources of metaperception: the case of Change Blindness Blindness

Perceivers generally show a poor ability to detect changes, a condition referred to as “Change Blindness” (CB). They are, in addition, “blind to their own blindness”. A common explanation of this “Change Blindness Blindness” (CBB) is that it derives from an inadequate, “photographical” folk-theory about perception. This explanation, however, does not account for intra-individual variations of CBB across trials. Our study aims to explore an alternative theory, according to which participants base their self-evaluations on two activity-dependent cues, namely search time and perceived success in prior trials. These cues were found to influence self-evaluation in two orthogonal ways: success-feedback influenced self-evaluation in a global, contextual way, presumably by recalibrating the norm of adequacy for the task. Search time influenced it in a local way, predicting the success of a given trial from its duration.     

The Effects of Scene Inversion on Change Blindness

In two experiments, participants searched for a difference between two views of a scene. In Experiment 1, the authors extended the change-blindness findings from previous work by R. A. Rensink, J. K. O'Regan, and J. J. Clark (1997), which used an experimenter-induced global transient, to a less artificial situation in which participants searched for a difference in a pair of photographic images presented simultaneously. To examine the idea that meaning-driven endogenous orienting was responsible for the previously observed advantage for changes in center-of-interest items, the authors inverted half of the image pairs. The advantage for center-of-interest items was replicated with upright displays, but it was completely eliminated by inversion, strongly supporting the role of meaning-driven endogenous orienting in this task. With flickering displays (Experiment 2), the center-of-interest effect was completely unaffected by inversion. The authors suggest that when change blindness is induced via flicker, scene modifications are typically found by stimulus-driven rather than by meaning-driven processes.     

多通道变化盲:理论、方法与进展

人们在特定条件下通常难以探测到事物的变化,这种现象发生在视、听、触感觉通道分别称为变化盲视、变话盲听和变化盲触。文章主要对以下四个方面进行详细的探讨:变化盲视及视觉表征理论、变化盲听及听觉信息加工机制、变化盲触及体表空间表征、多通道变化盲及空间注意和空间表征跨通道一致性本质。此外,文章还对多通道变化盲的理论深度和拓展方向及相关应用研究进行了展望。     

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。     

注意和工作记忆提取对变化盲视的影响

变化盲视是指观察者不能探测到视觉情境中明显的变化。本研究采用线索提示范式考察了注意和工作记忆提取对变化盲视的影响。结果发现,前置有效线索虽然不能缩短变化探测的时间,但可以降低变化盲视发生的概率,而后置有效线索既不能缩短变化探测的时间,也不能降低变化盲视的发生概率。结论表明,注意对变化盲视有显著影响,但工作记忆提取对变化盲视的影响不显著。     

Motivating Operations Affect Stimulus Control: A Largely Overlooked Phenomenon in Discrimination Learning

Several recent studies have explored what Michael (e.g., 1982) termed the value-altering effect and the behavior-altering effect of motivating operations. One aspect of the behavior-altering effect that has garnered no recent attention involves changes in stimulus control produced by motivating operations. To call attention to this aspect of the behavior-altering effect, we herein review 11 studies that are concerned with the influence of varying levels of food or water deprivation on stimulus generalization. These studies suggest that motivating operations influence stimulus control (a) by changing the evocative strength of not just an established discriminative stimulus, but also of stimuli that are physically similar to it; (b) by changing the range of stimuli that evoke the operant in question; and (c) by exerting these effects in a graded fashion. These findings are potentially of conceptual and applied significance, and it appears that further research examining how motivating operations alter stimulus control, including some studies suggested herein, is warranted.     

Fatherhood: How Differentiation and Identity Status Affect Attachment to Children

Fathers have often been misrepresented in studies evaluating the father's role and the father's relationship to his children, due to being evaluated by theories that were originally intended to study the relationship between mothers and children. The current study evaluates fathers' differentiation and identity status as predictors of their attachment to their children. We used structural equation modeling and multiple regression to evaluate the relationships among the variables. We found that differentiation predicted identity status but that neither differentiation nor identity status predicted attachment. Further, commitment significantly predicted parent attachment, relationship avoidance, and relationship anxiety, whereas crisis significantly predicted only relationship avoidance. The implications of these results for therapists are discussed.