Using magic to reconcile inattentional blindness and attentional misdirection.
Anthony S. Barnhart & Stephen D. Goldinger. Arizona State University. Recently ...
Using magic to reconcile inattentional blindness and attentional misdirection Anthony S. Barnhart & Stephen D. Goldinger
16.417
Arizona State University
Results: IB Rates
Results: Post-Critical Period IB Predictors
In its pure form (C1), the illusion produced rates of IB similar to those of Kuhn et al. (2008) and Simons & Chabris (1999). Reduction of IB rate in C2 runs counter to prediction from magic theory. 1
***
0.9 0.8
*
0.6 0.4
Kuhn & colleagues (2005; 2008; 2010) developed a unique magic trick for use in IB experimentation wherein a cigarette and lighter disappear. Although the method used to vanish the cigarette happened in full view, few participants detected it.
We adapted an illusion from Regal (1999). A coin placed beneath a napkin disappears, reappearing beneath a second napkin. The method behind the illusion happens in full view, but is often missed due to social cues and attentional workload. Method: Three between-subject experimental conditions:
The method replicated and extended findings from the IB (and change blindness) literature.
1) Experimental Trial & Free-Viewing Trial (n = 24) Analogous to structure of Kuhn & Tatler (2005).
Fixation location during critical period was not predictive of IB, suggesting differences in covert attentional deployment.
2) Three Control Trials (no movement), Experimental Trial, & Free-Viewing Trial (n = 17) Analogous to structure of Mack & Rock (1998).
