Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Predicting and manipulating the incidence of inattentional blindness

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Psychological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Inattentional blindness (IB) occurs when an observer, who is engaged in a resource-consuming task, fails to notice an unexpected although salient stimulus appearing in their visual field. The incidence of IB is affected by changes in stimulus-driven properties, but little research has examined individual differences in IB propensity. We examine working memory capacity (WMC), processing styles (flicker task), inhibition (Stroop task), and training in predicting IB. WMC is associated with IB (Experiments 1 and 2) but neither processing style (Experiment 1) nor inhibition (Experiment 2) was associated. In Experiment 2, prior training on a task reduced the incidence of IB compared to no prior training, and this effect was significantly larger when trained on the same tracking task as that used in the IB task rather than a different task. We conclude that IB is related to WMC and that training can influence the incidence of IB.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ansari, D., Lyons, I. M., van Eitneren, L., & Xu, F. (2007). Linking visual attention and number processing in the brain: The role of the temporo-parietal junction in small and large symbolic and non-symbolic number comparison. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 1845–1853.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Austen, E., & Enns, J. T. (2000). Change detection. Paying attention to detail. Psyche, 6(11). http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/v6/psyche-6-11-austen.html.

  • Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. (1974). Working memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 8, pp. 47–89). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becklen, R., & Cervone, D. (1983). Selective looking and the noticing of unexpected events. Memory & Cognition, 11(6), 601–608.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beech, A. R., Powell, T. J., McWilliams, J., & Claridge, G. S. (1989). Evidence of reduced “cognitive inhibition” in schizophrenia. British Journal of Psychology, 78, 349–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleckley, M. K., Durso, F. T., Crutchfield, J. M., Engle, R. W., & Khanna, M. M. (2003). Individual differences in working memory capacity predict visual attentional allocation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 884–889.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boot, W. R., Kramer, A. F., Simons, D. J., Fabiani, M., & Gratton, G. (2008). The effects of video game playing on attention, memory, and executive control. Acta Psychologia, 129, 387–398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boucart, M., Mobarek, N., Cuervo, C., & Danion, J. M. (1999). What is the nature of increased Stroop interference in schizophrenia. Acta Psychologica, 101, 3–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R. G., & Mardsen, C. D. (1988). Internal versus external cues and the control of attention in Parkinson’s disease. Brain, 111, 323–345.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright-Finch, U., & Lavie, N. (2007). The role of perceptual load in inattentional blindness. Cognition, 102(3), 321–340.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. D., Perlstein, W. M., Braver, T. S., Nystrom, L. E., Noll, D. C., Jonides, J., et al. (1997). Temporal dynamics of brain activation during a working memory task. Nature, 386, 604–608.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Conway, A. R. A., Cowan, N., & Bunting, M. F. (2001). The cocktail party phenomenon revisited: The importance of working memory capacity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 331–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conway, A. R. A., & Engle, R. W. (1994). Working memory and retrieval: A resource-dependent inhibition model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 354–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conway, A. R. A., Tuholski, S. W., Shisler, R. J., & Engle, R. W. (1999). The effect of memory load on negative priming: An individual differences investigation. Memory & Cognition, 27, 1042–1050.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbetta, M., Kincade, J. M., & Shulman, G. L. (2002). Neural systems for visual orienting and their relationships to spatial working memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14, 508–523.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number four in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioural & Brain Sciences, 24, 87–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egeth, H. E., & Yantis, S. (1997). Visual attention: Control, representation, and time course. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 269–297.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., & Johnston, J. C. (1992). Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 1030–1044.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2007). Action video game experience alters the spatial resolution of attention. Psychological Science, 18, 88–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hannon, E. M., & Richards, A. (2009). Is inattentional blindness related to individual differences in visual working memory capacity or executive control functioning. Perception (in press).

  • Hasher, L., & Zacks, R. L. (1988). Working memory, comprehension and aging: A review and a new view. In G. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 22, pp. 193–225). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kane, M. J., Bleckley, K. M., Conway, A. R. A., & Engle, R. W. (2001). A controlled-attention view of working-memory capacity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 169–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavie, N. (2005). Distracted and confused? Selective attention under load. Trends in Cognitive Science, 9, 75–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavie, N. (2006). The role of perceptual load in visual awareness. Brain Research, 1080(1), 91–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mack, A., & Rock, I. (1998). Inattentional blindness. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marois, R., Leung, H. C., & Gore, J. C. (2000). A stimulus-driven approach to object identity and location processing in the human brain. Neuron, 25, 717–728.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Most, S. B., Simons, D. J., Scholl, B. J., & Chabris, C. F. (2000). Sustained inattentional blindness: The role of location in the detection of unexpected dynamic events. Psyche, 6(14). http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/v6/psyche-6-14-most.html.

  • Most, S. B., Simons, D. J., Scholl, B. J., Jimenez, R., Clifford, E., & Chabris, C. F. (2001). How not to be seen: The contribution of similarity and selective ignoring to sustained inattentional blindness. Psychological Science, 12(1), 9–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Navon, D. (1977). Forest before trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception. Cognitive Psychology, 9, 353–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neisser, U. (1979). The control of information pickup in selective looking. In A. D. Pick (Ed.), Perception and its development (pp. 201–219). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neisser, U., & Becklen, R. (1975). Selective looking: Attending to visually specified events. Cognitive Psychology, 7(4), 480–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, D. J. (2003). Surprising studies of visual awareness (DVD). Champaign, IL: Viscog Productions. http://www.viscog.com.

  • Simons, D. J., & Chabris, C. F. (1999). Gorillas in our midst: sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception, 28, 1059–1074.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, D. J., & Jensen, M. S. (2009). The effects of individual differences and task difficulty on inatttentional blindness. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 398–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snodgrass, J. G., & Corwin, J. (1988). Pragmatics of measuring recognition memory: Applications to dementia and amnesia. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 177, 34–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Todd, J. J., Fougnie, D., & Marois, R. (2005). Visual short-term memory load suppresses temporo-parietal junction activity and induces inattentional blindness. Psychological Science, 16(12), 965–972.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Todd, J. J., & Marois, R. (2004). Capacity limit of visual short-term memory in human posterior parietal cortex. Nature, 428, 751–754.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, M. L., & Engle, R. W. (1989). Is working memory capacity task dependent? Journal of Memory and Language, 28(2), 127–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Unsworth, N., Heitz, R. P., Schrock, J. C., & Engle, R. W. (2005). An automated version of the operation span task. Behaviour Research Methods, 37(3), 498–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitkovitch, M., Bishop, S., Dancey, C., & Richards, A. (2002). Stroop interference and negative priming in patients with multiple sclerosis. Neuropsychologia, 40, 1570–1576.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, E. K., McCollough, A. W., & Machizawa, M. G. (2005). Neural measures reveal individual differences in controlling access to working memory. Nature, 438, 500–503.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by the Leverhulme Foundation awarded to the first author under grant number F/07 112/R.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Psychological Sciences, School of Science, Birkbeck College, University of London, Malet Street, London, WC1E 7HX, UK

    Anne Richards, Emily M. Hannon & Nazanin Derakshan

Authors
  1. Anne Richards
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Emily M. Hannon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nazanin Derakshan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anne Richards.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Richards, A., Hannon, E.M. & Derakshan, N. Predicting and manipulating the incidence of inattentional blindness. Psychological Research 74, 513–523 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-009-0273-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-009-0273-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation