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

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

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 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

Central Original

Peripheral

Central with Focus Original with Focus

Peripheral with Focus

Results Dependent Variable The number of correctly detected changes out of a possible 5

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 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 Analysis 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 Analysis 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 Results significant at p <.001 level

Discussion Main 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 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 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 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 Central changes are more often detected than peripheral changes Attention is naturally focused centrally Attention plays a role in change detection

Questions? THE END