Cognitive area: Simons and Chabris Flashcards Preview

Psychology! > Cognitive area: Simons and Chabris > Flashcards

Flashcards in Cognitive area: Simons and Chabris Deck (46)
Loading flashcards...
1
Q

What was the key theme of Simons and Chabris’ research?

A

Visual inattention

2
Q

What is inattentional blindness?

A

The failure to see an event or object in your field of vision because you are so focussed on other elements of what you can see

3
Q

What two types of research do S and C refer to that have previously investigated inattentional blindness?

A

Computer based dynamic displays and video based dynamic events

4
Q

What are computer based dynamic displays?

A

A visual equivalent to Moray’s work, P’s were asked to judge line lengths that made up crosses and data was collected on whether P’s would miss ‘unexpected events’ such as a smiley face

5
Q

Who conducted the computer based dynamic display research?

A

Mack and Rock

6
Q

What are video based dynamic events?

A

Known as ‘selective looking’, research investigated inattentional blindness using a more realistic event (a basketball match between 6 players) which were superimposed on each other and data was collected on whether P’s would notice a woman walking through the match with an umbrella

7
Q

Who conducted the previous research on inattentional blindness whereby a video based dynamic event was used?

A

Neisser

8
Q

Why did Mack and Rock and Neisser’s studies lack ecological validity?

A

Because people do not normally judge the lengths of lines in everyday life and because the videos were superimposed on each other

9
Q

How/why was Neisser’s ask an example of sustained inattentional blindness?

A

Because the unexpected event was 4 seconds long

10
Q

What did Simons and Chabris want to confirm with their research?

A

That inattentional blindness occurs in a realistic complex situation (ie where the unexpected event lasts for 5 seconds or more, but is nonetheless unnoticed by observers)

11
Q

What other 4 variables did S and C want to test?

A

Whether colour of unexpected event would have an effect on inattentional blindness
Whether a particularly unusual event would be detected
Whether a more difficult task would increase inattentional blindness
Whether a more realistic video would give different findings to Neisser’s research

12
Q

What research method did S and C use?

A

Lab experiment

13
Q

What experimental design did S and C use and justify this

A

Independent measures as each P was only tested in 1 condition

14
Q

Describe the sample

A

228 P’s, almost all of whom were students

15
Q

What rewards were P’s offered for taking part?

A

A single payment or a large candy bar

16
Q

Describe some of the controls used in each of the video clips

A

Same actors, time of day and location
2 teams of 3 players
Standard basketball

17
Q

What was the standard pass order of the ball?

A

1 > 2 > 3

18
Q

What was the size of the area used for the video clips?

A

3 x 5m

19
Q

At what time in the video did the unexpected event occur?

A

Between 44 and 48 seconds

20
Q

What were the 4 IV’s?

A

The construction of the video, what the P’s focussed on, difficulty of task and the unexpected event that occurred

21
Q

What were the 2 conditions for the construction of the video?

A

Transparent or opaque

22
Q

What were the 2 conditions for what the P’s focussed on?

A

Black or white

23
Q

What were the 2 conditions for the difficulty of the task?

A

Easy or hard

24
Q

What were the 2 conditions for the unexpected event that occurred?

A

Umbrella woman or gorilla

25
Q

Were the participants tested individually or in groups?

A

Individually

26
Q

What instructions were P’s given before viewing the clip?

A

Pay attention to either the white or black team

27
Q

Whilst watching the video how did P’s keep score of the passes?

A

They took a mental note

28
Q

What were P’s asked to count in the hard task?

A

The number of aerial and bounce passes

29
Q

What were the 3 questions P’s were asked after watching the clip?

A

i) While you were doing the counting, did you notice anything unusual in the video?
ii) Did you notice anything other than the 6 players?
iii) Did you see a gorilla/woman carrying an umbrella walk across the screen?

30
Q

If P’s answered ‘yes’ to any of the follow up questions, what were they asked to do?

A

To provide details of what they had seen

31
Q

What happened to the questions if P’s mentioned the unexpected event at any point?

A

The rest of the questions weren’t asked

32
Q

How did researchers stick to ethical guidelines at the end of the procedure?

A

P’s were given a full debrief

33
Q

What was the overall level of inattentional blindness?

A

46%

34
Q

Why was data from 36 P’s removed from the set?

A

They had seen a similar video before
They had lost count
They had made an inaccurate count of passes

35
Q

From the results, how could it be explained that P’s were more likely to notice the unexpected event while watching the opaque video?

A

Because the opaque video was more realistic than the transparent video

36
Q

Were P’s more likely to notice the unexpected event when the task was easy or hard and why?

A

More likely to notice the event in the easy task because it required less focus

37
Q

Were P’s more likely to notice the umbrella woman or the gorilla?

A

More likely to notice the umbrella woman as the umbrella made her taller than the other players and was more unusual

38
Q

Did S and C adhere to ethical guidelines?

A

Yes

39
Q

Was the procedure standardised and replicable (internal reliability)?

A

Yes - high level controls (e.g. time of unexpected event, same location, standard pass order)

40
Q

Was the sample large enough to suggest a consistent effect (external reliability)?

A

Yes - 192 is a good sample size which showed consistency for inattentional blindness

41
Q

Was it an accurate test of inattentional blindness? (construct validity)

A

Was a highly controlled lab experiment so there may have been potential demand characteristics

42
Q

Can the sample be generalised from? (population validity)

A

Not necessarily - only undergrad students and all had volunteered

43
Q

Was the scenario true to life? (ecological validity)

A

The actual event lacks ecological validity however, the use of an opaque video makes it more valid

44
Q

Why can S and C’s results be argued to have high concurrent validity?

A

Because the results concur with Neisser’s study

45
Q

In what way can S and C’s study be argued to be ethnocentric?

A

All P’s were American students, however, we all have the same brain structure so we would expect the same results in other cultures

46
Q

What did S and C conclude?

A

That objects can pass through our central field of vision and still not be seen if they are not specifically attended to