Change blindness is a perceptual phenomenon that occurs when changes in the visual stimulus are introduced and the observer does not realize it. For example, the observer often fails to see the main difference introduced into the image while it blinks and lights up again. The ability of the poor to detect change has been debated to reflect the fundamental limitations of human attention. Changing blindness has been a highly researched topic and some argue that it may have important practical implications in areas such as eyewitness testimony and impaired driving.
Video Change blindness
History
Observation of early anecdotes
Research on blindness changes developed from investigations in other phenomena such as eye movements and working memory. Although individuals have very good memories, whether they have seen images or not, they are generally poor considering the smaller details in the picture. When we are visually stimulated with complex images, most likely the individual retains only one essence of an image and not an overall picture.
Laboratory studies of blindness change began in the 1970s in the context of eye movement research. McConkie undertook the first study of the change of blindness involving changes in words and texts; in this study, the changes were introduced while observers made saccadic eye movements. Observers often fail to notice this change.
In the late 1980s, the first clearly published experimental demonstration showed very poor detection of changes in complex displays in short intervals with no eye movement involved. Pashler (1988) suggests that the observer is bad at detecting changes entered in the letters while the screen blinks and lights up, even if the offset is as short as 67 milliseconds (although the offset is shorter than that which results in a much more effective detection of change). Pashler concludes by noting how strange that people generally report having "a clear sense of understanding the identity and location of a large number of objects in a scene" (p.377), and that given this introspective feeling, it seems quite surprising how poor the detection of change they.
Research in the 1990s and 2000s
With the emergence of the ability to present intricate real-world images on a computer screen, Dr. George McConkie, in the early 1990s, as part of a new initiative from the Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, started a new effort. to investigate why the world looks stable and continuous despite a shifted retinal input signal that accompanies each saccade. This study began when John Grimes and Dr. George McConkie (1996) began using actual photographs to study visual stability. The development of this blindness change research is able to show the effect of blindness changes in a more realistic setting. In addition, further research suggests that rather large changes will not be detected when they occur during saccadic movements of the eye. In this first such experiment, in 1995, Blackmore et al. force saccade by moving the image and making changes in the scene at the same time. The ability of the observer to detect changes falls to chance. The effect is stronger using this method than when using a brief gray flash between images, although subsequent research mostly uses gray flashing or masking excitement. Another finding based on similar research suggests that changes are easily taken by participants when the eye is fixated at the point of change. Therefore, the eye must be immediately fixated on the area of ​​change in order to be noticed. This is called the target saccade theory of visual transsaccadic memory stability. However, other studies in the mid-1990s showed that individuals still had difficulty detecting changes even when they were directly fixated on a particular scene. A study by Rensink, O'Regan, & amp; Clarke points out that a change in blindness can have an effect even if the eyes are fixated on a scene. In this study, images are presented followed by a blank screen or "masking" a stimulus, followed by an initial image with a change. Stimulus masking almost acts like a saccadic eye movement that makes it significantly more difficult for individuals to detect changes. This is an important contribution to transforming blindness research because it shows that change can remain unnoticed with the smallest disturbance.
The study of blindness changes goes one step further into the practical application of this phenomenon. For example, there should be no masking stimulus for individuals to lose change in a scene. Individuals often take significantly longer to pay attention to certain changes if there are some small, high contrast shapes that are temporarily splattered over the image. This method to test the blindness of change is called "mudflow". This method is particularly relevant for individuals who drive when there is visual obstruction on the windshield. These obstructions can interfere with an individual's ability to detect changes in their environment that can result in severe negative consequences while driving.
Maps Change blindness
Recent research (2010 -)
Change detection
Research shows that detecting changes in the task of blindness changes more easily when items are processed holistically, like faces. Individuals see changes faster when needed to detect changes in facial features than when needed to detect home image changes. However, individuals are better at identifying the nature of changes at home.
Other researchers have found that mental processing in blind change begins even before changes are presented. More specifically, there is an increase in brain activity in the parietal-occipital and occipital regions prior to the appearance of changes in the task of blindness of change.
The researchers also showed no difference in brain activity between detecting changes and identifying changes in an image. Detecting changes is associated with higher ERP (event-related potential) while identifying changes associated with increased ERP before and after changes are presented.
Additional research using fluctuations in ERP has observed that changes in images (altering blindness) are represented in the brain, even without the conscious awareness of the change.
Changing blindness can be effectively used in the process of visualizing real changes detected in 3D scenes. With the right technique it is possible to increase the perception of portion of a 3D scene that changes while hiding is not significant, but the reverse is still visible, change.
Lucid dreaming
Nightmares occur when a person realizes that the events experienced in the dream are strange or will not happen in a person's real life. Thus, the inability to see the strange nature of dreams has been triggered as an example of blindness change, also known as an individual who is not a non-clear dreamer. However, recent research has found that lucid dreamers do not perform better on the task of changing blindness than non-lucid dreamers. Therefore, the relationship between the clear dreamer and the change of blindness has been discredited to some extent.
In team
Another interesting field of research is the reduction of vulnerability to change blindness when individuals are placed in teams. Although changes in blindness are still observed in teams, studies have shown that changes between images are more concerned when individuals work in teams as opposed to individuals. Both team and communication teams help to identify changes between images correctly.
Expertise
Another recent study looked at the relationship between skills and changing blindness. Physicists are more likely to notice a change between two physics problems than beginners. It is hypothesized that experts are better at analyzing problems at a deeper level whereas beginners use surface-level analysis. This study shows that observing the phenomenon of blindness change may depend on the context of the task.
Blind choice
Cognitive psychologists expand the study of the Change of Blindness into decision making. In one study, they showed participants ten pairs of faces and asked them to choose which face was more interesting. For some pairs, experiments use magic to show faces that they do not select. Only 26% of subjects saw a mismatch between their facial choices and the different faces shown instead. The researchers tested facial pairs that had similar high or low similarities, but detection rates did not differ between those conditions. Subjects were also asked to give reasons why they chose faces (though because of the sincerity of their hands actually did not choose it). Despite the discrepancies, subjects provide comparable responses in terms of emotionality, specificity, and certainty to faces that they have or are not really chosen. Further research has shown that failure to detect incompatibility between intent and yield exists in the choice of consumer products and in political attitudes.
Fight blindness change
Earlier research earlier this decade has shown that blindness changes can be neutralized by a number of methods. Distracting attention with visual cues can help lower the negative effects of blindness change. Superior stimulus stimulation improves the performance and reaction time in the same way. However, recent research has also been done to fight the blindness of tactile changes. A 2016 study by Riggs et al. shows that three successful methods for limiting blindness to tactile changes in distinguishing changes in vibration patterns are attention guidance, signal gradient and direct comparison. These three methods seek to bring attention to the field of change. The attention guide works proactively by increasing the signal frequency. The second and third methods are reactive and based on error feedback. Signal degrees increase the intensity of vibration after the change is missed. The direct comparison of matching the intensity of pre-change and post-change vibrations without the gap between after changes has been passed to support the use of relative rather than absolute appraisals. Although everything improves performance significantly, the second and third countermeasures are most effective. Concentration and attention is also a major factor in avoiding the blindness of change.
Changed animal blindness
Although relatively little research has been done on blindness changes in other animals, some animal species exhibit the same effect of a change in human blindness. Using the same motion detection paradigm for monkeys as humans, the researchers found similar results in showing changes in blindness in motion. Pigeons not only show changes in blindness, but are also influenced by the significance and timing of change in scenery like humans. Chimpanzees also have difficulty detecting changes in flicker-type visual search after a blank screen is displayed. The stimulus position switch is the most difficult for chimps to detect. The results show that the same level of concern is required for chimpanzees as human beings in these tasks.
Change detection paradigm
Paradigm of coercion saccade
This method is used in the first experiment, 1995. Changes are made in the image at the same time when the image is moved in an unpredictable direction, forcing the saccade. This method mimics eye movements and can detect blindness changes without introducing a blank screen, stimulation of masking or splashes of mud. However, it is unclear whether a small addition to the image will predict if people will not be able to see a larger change in the image to the same position in their eyes.
Flashing paradigm
In this paradigm, modified images and images are redirected forward and backward with a blank screen in the middle. This procedure is performed at a very high level and the observer is told to click the button as soon as they see the difference between the two images. This method of studying the blindness of change has helped researchers to find two very important findings. The first finding is that it usually takes a while for the individual to pay attention to the changes even though they are being instructed to look for change. In some cases, it can even take an individual more than a minute from a constant flicker to determine the location of the change. A second important finding is that the change toward the center of the image is noticed at a faster rate than the changes on the side of the image. Although the flicker paradigm was first used in the late 1990s, it is still frequently used in current research on blindness change and has contributed to recent knowledge about blindness change.
Enforced selection detection paradigm
Individuals tested under the forced-force paradigm are only allowed to view two images once before they make a choice. Both images are also displayed for the same amount of time. The flicker paradigm and enforced forced detection paradigm are known as deliberate change detection tasks, meaning that participants know they are trying to detect change. These studies have shown that even when participants focus their attention and look for a change, the change may remain unconscious.
Mudsplashes
Mudsplashes are small and high contrast shapes scattered across the image, but do not cover the area of ​​the image where the change takes place. This mudsplash effect prevents individuals from observing changes between two images. The practical application of this paradigm is that dangerous stimuli in a scene may be overlooked if there are fewer obstacles in the visual field of a person. Previously, it has been stated that humans have an excellent internal visual stimulus representation. Studies involving mud have shown that changes in blindness can occur because our internal representation of visual stimuli may be much worse than previous studies. Mudsplashes have not been used as often as flicker or forced-force detection paradigms in the study of blindness change, but have yielded many significant and innovative results.
Background segregation background
The foreground-background segregation method to study blindness changes using landscape photos with different foregrounds and backgrounds. Researchers using this paradigm have found that individuals are usually able to recognize relatively small changes in the foreground of an image. In addition, major changes to the background color take longer to detect. This paradigm is very important to change the research of blindness because many previous studies have not examined the location of changes in the visual field.
Neuroanatomy
Neuroimaging
Various studies have used MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) to measure brain activity when individuals detect (or fail to detect) changes in the environment. When the individual detects a change, the neural network of the parietal and right dorsolateral prefrontal lobe regions is very active. If the individual is instructed to detect changes in the face, the fusiform facial area is also activated significantly. In addition, other structures such as pulvin, cerebellum, and inferior temporal gyrus also show increased activation when individuals report changes. It has been proposed that the parietal and frontal cortex along with the cerebellum and pulvinar may be used to direct the organism's attention to environmental changes. Decreased activation in the brain area is observed if changes are not detected by the organism. Furthermore, neurological activation of this highlighted area of ​​the brain correlates with the individual's consciousness of change and not the physical change itself.
Other studies using fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging) have shown that when changes are not detected consciously, there is a significant decrease in the dorsolateral prefrontal and parietal lobe regions. These results further the importance of dorsolateral prefrontal and parietal cortext in detecting visual changes. In addition to fMRI studies, recent studies have used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to inhibit brain areas while participants were instructed to try to detect changes between two images. The results show that when the posterior parietal cortex (PPC) is inhibited, the individual is significantly slower in detecting changes. PPC is essential for encoding and maintaining visual images in short-term working memory, which shows the importance of PPC in detecting changes between images. In order for the changes to be detected, the first image information should be stored in working memory and compared with the second image. If PPC is inhibited, the area of ​​the brain responsible for encoding the visual image will not work properly. The information will not be encoded and will not be stored in working memory and compared with the second image, thus triggering the blindness of the change.
Role of attention
The role of attention is critical to the organism's ability to detect change. In order for the organism to detect change, visual stimulation must enter through the eye and continue through the visual flow in the brain. A study in 2004 showed that if the superior colliculus (responsible for eye movement) of the monkey's brain is electrically stimulated, there will be a significant decrease in reaction time to detect changes. Therefore, it is important for the organism to notice changes in order to be detected. The organism is only able to detect this change as visual stimulation comes through the eye (its motion is controlled by the superior colliculus) and then processed through the visual flow.
Influencing factor
Age
Age has been involved as one of the factors that modulate the severity of blindness change. In a study conducted by Veiel et al. it was found that older individuals were slower to detect changes in experiments of blindness change compared to younger individuals. This tendency was also noted by Caird et al., Who found that drivers aged 65 and older were more vulnerable to making the wrong decision after the paradigm of change in blindness was used at the intersection, rather than participants aged 18-64. The age difference in detection changes becomes most obvious when tasks are easier. While actual shift capabilities do not occur until at least age 65, public confidence in their ability to detect changes falls significantly in middle age.
Children aged 6-13 see colorful images from real-world scenes manipulated by color, object location, or deletion of objects, at the center or focus of the image peripherals. Adults are more accurate when considering the changes that occur in the image. Children can accurately detect central changes, but are not as good at detecting peripheral changes, and the accuracy depends on the type of manipulation.
Caution is another factor that has been involved in blindness change. The increasing shift of attention reduces the severity of blindness changes and changes in the foreground are detected faster than changes made to the background of the image, the effect of a deliberate bias for the foreground element.
Community volunteers should focus on the screen and accurately identify if there is a change between a series of dots after being glued to a point in the center of the screen. Attentional disturbances by visual impairment and observer's ability to focus on potential changes are found to have an effect on attention with blindness of change.
Presentation of the object
The presentation of the object is the way in which the object appears and is the factor that determines the occurrence of blindness of change. Changing blindness can occur even without delay between the original image and the changed image, but only if the image changes forces the viewer to redefine the objects in the image. In addition, the appearance of new objects is more resistant to altering blindness than looming objects, and both the appearance of new objects and the looming objects are more resistant to altering blindness rather than the ebbing of an object. Furthermore, the appearance or onset of an object is more resistant to the occurrence of change of blindness than the loss or replacement of an object.
Use of substance
Alcohol can sometimes improve the blindness of change. For example, a drunk participant is quicker at detecting small changes in a large image view than a conscious participant. This can be attributed to a more passive view of a larger image, and the use of alcohol slows down a more controlled search process.
Active audiences involve more saccade than fixation. When viewing images with a more passive search, more information is processed with each fixation. Alcohol slows the movement and processing of the brain, thus causing more fixation points.
In another sense
In addition to changing the blindness caused by changes in the visual image, changing the blindness also exists for other senses:
- Deafness - Changing deafness is a concept of blindness change for hearing information. In his experiments, Vitevitch (2003) used a shadowing speech assignment to show deaf changes. He presented a list of words to the participants and asked them to repeat the words they heard simultaneously. In the middle of the list, the same or different speakers present the second half of the words to the participants. At least 40% of participants fail to detect the speaker changes as they occur. Fenn et al. call the participant on the phone and change the speaker in the middle of the conversation. Participants rarely pay attention to change. However, when explicitly monitoring changes, detection of participants increases. Neuhoff et al. (2015) expanded on the idea of ​​deaf change, and identified a new phenomenon called "slow-changing deafness" using a series of four experiments. In his first experiment, he had a participant who listened to a sustained speech that changed three semitones in tone over time. 50% of participants failed to notice changes. In the second and third experiments, the listener is informed of the possibility of change. In this trial, the detection rate increased dramatically. In the fourth experiment, the magnitude of the changes that occur in the stimulus increases, causing the detection rate to increase. This experiment shows that "slow-changing deafness" depends on the magnitude of changes in stimulus and audience expectations.
- Smell - Humans are constantly in a state of blindness due to poor spatial and temporal resolution with which the scent is detected. Although the odor of smell of human smell is very low, our olfactory attention is only caught by very high odor concentrations. The olfactory input consists of a series of sniffs that are separated in time. A long inter-sniff interval creates "anosmia changes," in which humans have a problem distinguishing smells that are not highly concentrated. This period of sensory habitation and very low odor concentrations on a regular basis do not result in subjective experience. This behavior is called "lack of experience". Somatosensory - Somatosensory altering blindness to tactile stimuli has been observed, and reveals important information about the difference from visual visibility to blindness. Auvray et al. (2008) experiments on the ability to detect changes between two tactile stimuli patterns presented to the fingertips. The experiment presents consecutive patterns separated by blank intervals, or by tactile, visual, or auditory masks. The results show that performance is interrupted when blank intervals are entered, and even more when the tactile mask is introduced. Changes in the tactile display consisting of two or three stimuli with only one diversion of which are not noticed, while some distractors are necessary for the visual display to be overlooked. This experiment has shown us that our ability to monitor tactile information is affected by more severe limitations than the same ability in visual modalities.
Practical implications
The phenomenon of change blindness has practical implications in the following areas:
Eyewitness testimonial
Research on the change of blindness has revealed the possibility of inaccuracy in eyewitness testimony. In many cases, witnesses are rarely able to detect changes in a criminal identity unless first intending to recall the intended incident. The inability to detect changes in this identity can lead to inaccuracies in identifying criminals, false eyewitness identification, and false beliefs. Therefore, eyewitness testimony should be handled carefully in court to avoid any of these negative consequences.
Driving ability
Older drivers make more incorrect decisions than younger drivers when faced with changes in sights at the intersection. This can be attributed to the fact that older people notice change at a slower rate than younger individuals. In addition, the location and relevance of the changes affect what is being watched while driving. Reaction time to driver peripheral changes is much slower than reaction time to changes occurring to the driver's visual field center. In addition, drivers can also recognize more relevant changes compared to irrelevant ones. Research on the effects of blindness change while driving can provide insight into the potential explanation of why car accidents happen.
Military
Military command and control personnel who monitor multiple screens have a delayed time to accurately identify changes due to the need to verify changes, as well as effective 'guesses' on some trials. Due to the fact that control personnel have delayed the reaction due to blindness changes, the design of the computer workstation interface may be very useful for improving reaction time and accuracy.
Change blindness blind
Changing blindness blindness is defined as a misplaced trust in one's ability to correctly identify visual changes. People are quite confident in their ability to detect change, but most people show poor performance on the task of changing blindness.
Factors that affect
- Perceived Success - Higher success perceptions from previous experiences expands individual beliefs to succeed in future experiences.
- Search Time - A longer time spent searching for visual changes creates a poor performance impression on the task. In other words, a shorter time in identifying the visual changes creates the impression of good performance and thus the individual will be overconfident in this ability.
Spotlight effect
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments