Processing without noticing in inattentional blindness: A replication of Moore and Egeth (1997) and Mack and Rock (1998)

Surreptitious online measures can reveal the processing of stimuli that people do not report noticing or cannot describe. People seem to glean everything from low-level Gestalt grouping information to semantic meaning from unattended and unreported stimuli, and this information seems capable of influencing performance and of priming semantic judgments. Moore and Egeth (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 339–352, 1997) provided evidence that judgments about the lengths of two lines were influenced by the grouping of background dots, even when subjects did not notice the pattern the dots formed. Mack and Rock (1998) reported that subjects could be primed to complete a stem with a word to which they were inattentionally blind. In this registered report, we replicated these two classic findings using large online samples (Ns = 260 and 448), finding support for the influence of grouping despite inattentional blindness, but not for word-stem priming.

[1]  J. Driver,et al.  New indirect measures of “inattentive” visual grouping in a change-detection task , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.

[2]  A. Treisman,et al.  Visual memory for novel shapes: implicit coding without attention. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[3]  Steven B. Most,et al.  How not to be Seen: The Contribution of Similarity and Selective Ignoring to Sustained Inattentional Blindness , 2001, Psychological science.

[4]  Dominique Lamy,et al.  Grouping does not require attention , 2006, Perception & psychophysics.

[5]  U. Neisser,et al.  Selective looking: Attending to visually specified events , 1975, Cognitive Psychology.

[6]  H. Egeth,et al.  Perception without attention: evidence of grouping under conditions of inattention. , 1997, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance.

[7]  Nilli Lavie,et al.  The role of perceptual load in inattentional blindness , 2007, Cognition.

[8]  Walter R. Boot,et al.  Using Mechanical Turk to Assess the Effects of Age and Spatial Proximity on Inattentional Blindness , 2015 .

[9]  Emily J. Ward,et al.  Inattentional blindness reflects limitations on perception, not memory: Evidence from repeated failures of awareness , 2015, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[10]  I. Rock,et al.  Perceptual organization and attention , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[11]  Glyn W Humphreys,et al.  Perceptual Organization Without Perception , 2010, Psychological science.

[12]  Hadley Wickham,et al.  ggplot2 - Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (2nd Edition) , 2017 .

[13]  D. Simons.  Attentional capture and inattentional blindness , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[14]  Daniel Holender,et al.  Semantic activation without conscious identification in dichotic listening, parafoveal vision, and visual masking: A survey and appraisal , 1986, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[15]  Brian J. Scholl,et al.  Forming and updating object representations without awareness: evidence from motion-induced blindness , 2005, Vision Research.

[16]  Daniel J. Simons,et al.  Selective Attention in Inattentional Blindness: Selection is Specific but Suppression is Not , 2017 .

[17]  C. Moore,et al.  Using inattentional blindness as an operational definition of unattended: The case of surface completion , 2003 .

[18]  C. Chabris,et al.  Gorillas in Our Midst: Sustained Inattentional Blindness for Dynamic Events , 1999, Perception.