Simon and Chabris (1999)

Question 1

What is the full name of this study?

Answer 1

Simons & Chabris (1999) Gorillas in our midst: sustained in-attentional blindness for dynamic events

Question 2

What does this study build upon?

Answer 2

classic studies of divided visual attention to:
- examine inattentional blindness for complex objects and events in dynamic scenes

Question 3

What did previous studies fail to do?

Answer 3

• not systematically consider the role of task difficulty in detection
• no direct comparisons made between performance and superimposed version of the display with a live version

Question 4

How did this study aim to correct past failures?

Answer 4

• several video segments
• same set of actions
• same location
• same day

Question 5

What is an overview of this study?

Answer 5

• large number of naïve participants watched video recordings
• later answer questions about unexpected event

Question 6

What is the sample?

Answer 6

• 228 participants = ‘observers’
• undergraduates
• volunteers

Question 7

What is a strength of the sample?

Answer 7

large = more representative = population validity = generalisable

Question 8

What is a weakness of the sample?

Answer 8

36 participants were removed = 192 as the sample

Question 9

What is the sampling technique?

Answer 9

self-selected (volunteer)

Question 10

What is a strength of volunteer sampling?

Answer 10

easy to obtain

Question 11

What is a weakness of volunteer sampling?

Answer 11

only a certain type of person volunteers = not as representative or generalisable

Question 12

What were the participants given as a reward for participating?

Answer 12

either a large candy bar or paid a single fee

Question 13

What is a strength of offering a reward?

Answer 13

gives incentive to stay and complete the study - less chance of attrition

Question 14

What is a weakness of offering a reward?

Answer 14

participants may not feel like they have the right to withdraw

Question 15

What was the sample for the controlled observation?

Answer 15

12

Question 16

What was the controlled observation?

Answer 16

the video where the gorilla thumps its chest

Question 17

What was the method used for this study?

Answer 17

laboratory experiment

Question 18

What is a strength of the method?

Answer 18

• high control over extraneous variables = more valid results

Question 19

What is a weakness of the method?

Answer 19

• lacks ecological validity
• lacks mundane realism

Question 20

What is the design?

Answer 20

independent measures

Question 21

What are the strengths of the design?

Answer 21

• less chance of order effects
• less chance of demand characteristics

Question 22

What are the weaknesses of the design?

Answer 22

more participants are needed

Question 23

What are the 4 IVs?

Answer 23

1- Transparent/umbrella
2- Transparent/gorilla
3- Opaque/umbrella
4- Opaque/gorilla

Question 24

What are the 4 task conditions?

Answer 24

1- White/Easy (passes by white shirts)
2- White/Hard (bounce or aerial passes by white shirts)
3- Black/Easy (passes by black shirts)
4- Black/Hard (bounce or aerial passes by black shirts)

Question 25

How many conditions are there total?

Answer 25

16

Question 26

What is the DV?

Answer 26

noticing the unexpected event

Question 27

What type of media was used in this study?

Answer 27

- videotapes - 4 - 75 seconds each - filmed using SVHS

Question 28

What did each tape have in common?

Answer 28

- 2 teams - 3 players each (6) - white shirts vs. black shirts

Question 29

What apparatus was used?

Answer 29

a standard orange basketball

Question 30

Where did the videos get filmed?

Answer 30

in front of 3 elevator doors

Question 31

What was the standardised passing order?

Answer 31

1-2-3-1-2-3-1

Question 32

What type of movements were often displayed?

Answer 32

- bounce or aerial passes - dribbling - moving arms - other movements of a similar fashion

Question 33

What was the purpose of the movement of the players?

Answer 33

to mimic stimuli from previous research

Question 34

When in the videos did the unexpected event occur?

Answer 34

44-48 seconds in

Question 35

How long did the unexpected event last?

Answer 35

5 seconds

Question 36

What was the unexpected event in one condition?

Answer 36

- umbrella - tall woman - left to right

Question 37

What was the unexpected event in the other condition?

Answer 37

- gorilla costume - short woman - covered whole body (by costume) - left to right

Question 38

What was the separate video also filmed?

Answer 38

- gorilla event - right to left instead - opaque

Question 39

What were the two styles of video?

Answer 39

opaque and transparent

Question 40

How were the transparent videos filmed?

Answer 40

- all parts filmed separately - superimposed through editing software - non-linear editing software

Question 41

How were the opaque videos filmed?

Answer 41

- simultaneously - rehearsal was needed

Question 42

Why was rehearsal needed for the opaque videos?

Answer 42

- eliminate collisions - making the patterns of movement appear natural

Question 43

How many experimenters were there?

Answer 43

21

Question 44

Why were there so many experimenters?

Answer 44

to ensure standardisation = more reliable

Question 45

How were participants tested?

Answer 45

individually

Question 46

What ethical issue was addressed at the start of the study?

Answer 46

informed consent

Question 47

What were participants told before they watched the video?

Answer 47

- an outline of what the video is eg., a video of 6 people 3 in white shirts and 3 in black passing a basketball - who to focus on e.g., the white shirts and how many passes

Question 48

What were participants told to do?

Answer 48

- keep a mental count of passes (easy con) or aerial and bounce passes (hard con) - write down amount they counted on paper immediately after

Question 49

What were participants asked after they watched the video?

Answer 49

3 surprise questions

Question 50

What were some of the surprise questions?

Answer 50

1- did you notice anything unusual? 2- anything other than the 6 players? 3- [unexpected event]?

Question 51

Why were some participants details omitted?

Answer 51

- already aware of the phenomenon - lost count of passes - inaccurately counted passes

Question 52

What are some general findings?

Answer 52

- 54% noticed the unexpected event - more noticeable in the opaque condition - 33% failed to report the unexpected event - transparent condition harder - umbrella woman was noticed more than the gorilla

Question 53

What are some specific findings?

Answer 53

- noticed gorilla more when watching black team = 58% vs. 27%

Question 54

What are the findings of the controlled observation?

Answer 54

- 50% noticed the unexpected event

Question 55

What are the conclusions of this study?

Answer 55

- individuals are more likely to notice an event if they are visually similar - individuals have sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events