Failures of Visual Awareness: Inattentional Blindness and Attentional Blink

Failures of visual awareness occur when attentional processing limitations prevent an observer from detecting clearly visible stimuli. These failures can occur in a variety of contexts; two well-known research examples are inattentional blindness (IB) and attentional blink (AB). IB involves failure...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Vanessa Beanland, Kristen Pammer
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2011-05-01
Series:i-Perception
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1068/ic227
id doaj-88d22f0da82a4a1b824bee47c27a6a2a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-88d22f0da82a4a1b824bee47c27a6a2a2020-11-25T03:17:14ZengSAGE Publishingi-Perception2041-66952011-05-01210.1068/ic22710.1068_ic227Failures of Visual Awareness: Inattentional Blindness and Attentional BlinkVanessa Beanland0Kristen Pammer1Accident Research Centre, Monash UniversityDepartment of Psychology, The Australian National UniversityFailures of visual awareness occur when attentional processing limitations prevent an observer from detecting clearly visible stimuli. These failures can occur in a variety of contexts; two well-known research examples are inattentional blindness (IB) and attentional blink (AB). IB involves failure to detect an irrelevant, unexpected stimulus when attention is engaged by another primary task. AB involves failure to detect a relevant, expected stimulus, which occurs when a second target is presented within 180–500ms of the first target in a rapid serial visual presentation stream. Because both involve failures of visual awareness, IB and AB are often discussed in conjunction with each other. Though past research has implicated similar cognitive processes underlying both phenomena, no evidence directly correlated the two. We tested 54 observers on both an IB task and an AB task. Consistent with our hypotheses, we found that “non-noticers” who failed to detect an unexpected stimulus in the IB task also demonstrated larger AB magnitude, with a particular dip at lag 2, compared with noticers of the unexpected stimulus. This suggests that individual differences play a role in failures of visual awareness and that some observers may be more or less susceptible to failures of visual awareness generally.https://doi.org/10.1068/ic227
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Vanessa Beanland
Kristen Pammer
spellingShingle Vanessa Beanland
Kristen Pammer
Failures of Visual Awareness: Inattentional Blindness and Attentional Blink
i-Perception
author_facet Vanessa Beanland
Kristen Pammer
author_sort Vanessa Beanland
title Failures of Visual Awareness: Inattentional Blindness and Attentional Blink
title_short Failures of Visual Awareness: Inattentional Blindness and Attentional Blink
title_full Failures of Visual Awareness: Inattentional Blindness and Attentional Blink
title_fullStr Failures of Visual Awareness: Inattentional Blindness and Attentional Blink
title_full_unstemmed Failures of Visual Awareness: Inattentional Blindness and Attentional Blink
title_sort failures of visual awareness: inattentional blindness and attentional blink
publisher SAGE Publishing
series i-Perception
issn 2041-6695
publishDate 2011-05-01
description Failures of visual awareness occur when attentional processing limitations prevent an observer from detecting clearly visible stimuli. These failures can occur in a variety of contexts; two well-known research examples are inattentional blindness (IB) and attentional blink (AB). IB involves failure to detect an irrelevant, unexpected stimulus when attention is engaged by another primary task. AB involves failure to detect a relevant, expected stimulus, which occurs when a second target is presented within 180–500ms of the first target in a rapid serial visual presentation stream. Because both involve failures of visual awareness, IB and AB are often discussed in conjunction with each other. Though past research has implicated similar cognitive processes underlying both phenomena, no evidence directly correlated the two. We tested 54 observers on both an IB task and an AB task. Consistent with our hypotheses, we found that “non-noticers” who failed to detect an unexpected stimulus in the IB task also demonstrated larger AB magnitude, with a particular dip at lag 2, compared with noticers of the unexpected stimulus. This suggests that individual differences play a role in failures of visual awareness and that some observers may be more or less susceptible to failures of visual awareness generally.
url https://doi.org/10.1068/ic227
work_keys_str_mv AT vanessabeanland failuresofvisualawarenessinattentionalblindnessandattentionalblink
AT kristenpammer failuresofvisualawarenessinattentionalblindnessandattentionalblink
_version_ 1724632525610942464