Simon and Chabris

• What is the background?

  • Interested in inattentional blindness

  
  

  • Originally investigated - Participants shown video of 2 teams of players passing basketballs between each other and a women carrying an umbrella walking between them
• What are the aims?

  Results from Neissers affected by:

  
  

  -How he made the video (transparency)

  -If the same results would occur from a more realistic opaque video (all participants + unexpected event in same shot)
• What was the sample?

  -228 -> mainly Harvard undergrads

  
  

  -36 participants data not analysed due to being aware of what inattentional blindness is

  
  

  -Results based on the 192 participants (12 in each groups)
• What were 2 of the IV's?

  • Opaque or transparent video

  
  

  • Unexpected events -> woman carrying umbrella or wearing gorilla costume (in sight for 5 minutes from right to left)
• What was the DV?

  If participants saw the unexpected event or not
• What was the procedure?

  Participants watched 75 second video and asked questions on what they had seen

  
  

  Participants were in 1/16 conditions based around manipulation of the 4 IV's
• What was the overall level of inattentional blindness?

  -54% saw the unexpected event

  
  

  -46% didn't
• What are 2 conclusions of the study?

  • Opaque umbrella noticed more (100%) than transparent (58%)

  
  

  • Participants noticed the umbrella more than the gorilla -> may be because we expect to see this kind of situation -> less likely to block out if it takes up more of the screen
• Was the study large enough to show trends that wouldn't of been distorted by outliners? (external reliability)

  -No -> only 12 in each condition (192 participants split into 16 conidtions)
• Can the sample be generalised to the wider population? (population validity)

  -No -> not everybody are students -> limited occupation + don't know gender balance or age range + likely to reflect limited range of social backgrounds as Harvard is a prestigious uni
• How does the study link to the debate of usefulness? + what does it tell us about mobile phone use whilst driving

  -Inattentional barrier -> more focused on phone than road -> increase of potential crash
• How does the study link to holism?

  -Multiple IV's in the study -> etc transparent or opaque video
• How can the study link the determinism?

  -Attention process can influence us -> our behaviour etc

  
  

  -Ability to pay attention and notice unexpected event is determined by the amount of attention we have available