The Effects of Focused Attention and Varied Peripheral and Central Changes on Change Blindness and Change Detection

1. The Effects of Focused Attention and Varied Peripheral and Central Changes on Change Blindness and Change Detection Teal Maxwell Emily Welch Naomi Janett Jessica Padgett

2. Defining Terms • Change Blindness • Change Detection • Focused Attention

3. Previous ResearchType of Change • Central changes were very frequently detected, but peripheral changes were rarely detected unless the participants’ attention was directed to the peripheral images (Turatto, Angrilli, Mazza, Umilta, & Driver 2002). • Peripheral changes take longer to detect (Shore & Klein, 2000).

4. Previous ResearchArea of Focus • Usually details of an image can only be remembered if one’s attention is focused on the feature that is changing (Rensink,O’Regan & Clark 1997). • Cueing participants to the area of change substantially increases their ability to detect a change (Turatto, Angrilli, Mazza, Umilta, & Driver 2002).

5. Variables • Independent • Type of Change (Central or Peripheral) • Area of Focus (Central, Peripheral, or None) • Dependent • Number of Correctly Identified Changes (out of 5)

7. Hypothesis • Central changes will be more easily detected than peripheral changes • With attention guidance more changes will be detected • Participants in the condition with central changes and centrally focused attention will correctly detect more changes than the other experimental conditions

8. MethodParticipants • 200 total participants • 31 Central Change and Central Focus • 37 Central Change and Peripheral Focus • 37 Central Change and No Focus • 30 Peripheral Change and Central Focus • 30 Peripheral Change and Peripheral Focus • 35 Peripheral Change and No Focus • Female Mount Holyoke College students • Random assignment

9. Materials • 2 photos per condition (6 total conditions) • Photos taken by an Olympus digital camera

10. Materials • Pictures printed on a 8.5” x 11” sheet of paper • Changes detected were reported on 3” x 5” notecard • Stopwatch used for timing • Consent form • Debriefing statement

11. Procedure • Participant signed consent form • Participants given notecard • Directions read depending on condition • Original photo shown for 30 seconds • 5 second pause • Modified photo shown for 30 seconds • Participants recorded changes detected • Debriefing statement presented

12. Original Central

13. Original Peripheral

14. Original with Focus Central with Focus

15. Original with Focus Peripheral with Focus

16. ResultsDependent Variable • The number of correctly detected changes out of a possible 5

17. Hypothesis • Central changes will be more easily detected than peripheral changes • With attention guidance more changes will be detected • Participants in the condition with central changes and centrally focused attention will correctly detect more changes than the other experimental conditions

18. ResultsAnalysis • Data were analyzed using a two-way independent groups ANOVA • Central changes • Mean: 3.03 • Standard Deviation: 1.63 • Peripheral changes • Mean: 1.71 • Standard Deviation: 1.41 • Results significant, p <.001

20. ResultsAnalysis • Central focus • Mean: 2.56 • Standard Deviation: 2.22 • Peripheral focus • Mean: 1.89 • Standard Deviation: 1.23 • No focus • Mean: 2.74 • Standard Deviation: 1.33

22. Central Change-Central Focus Mean: 4.56 Standard Deviation: 0.57 Central Change-Peripheral Focus Mean: 1.43 Standard Deviation: 1.28 Central Change-No Focus Mean: 3.35 Standard Deviation: 1.03 Peripheral Change-Central Focus Mean: 0.5 Standard Deviation: 1.14 Peripheral Change-Peripheral Focus Mean: 2.47 Standard Deviation: 0.90 Peripheral Change-No Focus Mean: 2.09 Standard Deviation: 1.31 ResultsAnalysis Results significant at p <.001 level

24. DiscussionMain Effect One • Participants in the central condition correctly detected significantly more changes than participants in the peripheral condition. • Central changes are detected more frequently (Turatto, et al. 2002).

25. DiscussionMain Effect Two • Participants who received central attention guidance or no attention guidance detected significantly more changes than those receiving peripheral guidance. • When attention is focused on the central aspects of an image, changes are detected more frequently than when no guidance is given (Turatto, et al. 2002).

26. DiscussionInteraction • For central changes • those who received central attention guidance performed better than those receiving peripheral or no attention guidance • those who received no attention guidance performed better than those receiving peripheral attention guidance • For peripheral changes • those who received peripheral attention guidance correctly detected more changes than those receiving central or no attention guidance. • those who received no attention guidance correctly detected more changes than those receiving central attention guidance

27. DiscussionInteraction - Previous Research • When attention is directed to the area in which the change is taking place, the change is more likely to be detected (Turatto, et al. 2002). • Without attention guidance, new stimuli “overwrite” what is stored in visual memory (Rensink, et al. 1997).

28. DiscussionImplications • Central changes are more often detected than peripheral changes • Attention is naturally focused centrally • Attention plays a role in change detection

29. Questions? • THE END