The Effects of Focused Attention and Varied Peripheral and Central Changes on Change Blindness and Change Detection - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Slide1 l.jpg
Download
1 / 29

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. Defining Terms. Change Blindness Change Detection Focused Attention. Previous Research Type of Change.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

Download Presentation

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

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Slide1 l.jpg

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


Defining terms l.jpg

Defining Terms

  • Change Blindness

  • Change Detection

  • Focused Attention


Previous research type of change l.jpg

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).


Previous research area of focus l.jpg

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).


Variables l.jpg

Variables

  • Independent

    • Type of Change (Central or Peripheral)

    • Area of Focus (Central, Peripheral, or None)

  • Dependent

    • Number of Correctly Identified Changes (out of 5)


  • Hypothesis l.jpg

    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


    Method participants l.jpg

    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


  • Materials l.jpg

    Materials

    • 2 photos per condition (6 total conditions)

    • Photos taken by an Olympus digital camera


    Materials10 l.jpg

    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


    Procedure l.jpg

    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


    Slide12 l.jpg

    Original

    Central


    Slide13 l.jpg

    Original

    Peripheral


    Slide14 l.jpg

    Original with Focus

    Central with Focus


    Slide15 l.jpg

    Original with Focus

    Peripheral with Focus


    Results dependent variable l.jpg

    ResultsDependent Variable

    • The number of correctly detected changes out of a possible 5


    Hypothesis17 l.jpg

    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


    Results analysis l.jpg

    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


  • Results analysis20 l.jpg

    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


  • Results analysis22 l.jpg

    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


    Discussion main effect one l.jpg

    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).


    Discussion main effect two l.jpg

    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).


    Discussion interaction l.jpg

    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


    Discussion interaction previous research l.jpg

    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).


    Discussion implications l.jpg

    DiscussionImplications

    • Central changes are more often detected than peripheral changes

    • Attention is naturally focused centrally

    • Attention plays a role in change detection


    Slide29 l.jpg

    • Questions?

    • THE END


  • Login