FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2769490627> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2769490627 abstract "Finding the Change: The Role of Working Memory and Spatial Ability in Change Blindness Detection Gary L. Bradshaw (glb2@ra.msstate.edu), Courtney Bell (cmb18@msstate.edu), J. Martin Giesen (jmg1@ra.msstate.edu) Psychology Department, Mississippi State University P.O. Box 6161, Mississippi State, MS 39762 Introduction Results Change blindness, an inability to spot changes in a visual scene, occurs when normal motion transients are masked by factors such as blank screens, “cuts” from one camera to another, and the like (Simons, 2000). Rensink, O’Regan, & Clark (1997) employed a “flicker” technique to induce change blindness: two versions of an image are presented in alternation, but a blank visual screen is shown between each image. Under these circumstances subjects may take many seconds to notice even large changes in the image, especially if the change occurs in a background element. Change blindness reveals important limitations in our ability to process visual scene information. Several explanations have been advanced to explain why change blindness occurrs. To date, no single explanation has gained broad acceptance (Simons, 2000). In the current report, we consider a complementary question: given that change blindness occurs, what factors enable people to overcome it? Our methodology is to exploit the natural individual differences that appear between individuals in their ability to detect changes. The correlational analysis showed that several ability tests correlated significantly with the accuracy of change blindness detection (Table 1), while other factors correlated with the latency of change detection . Table 1: Correlations with Change Blindness Accuracy Change Blind. Accuracy Shape Mem.. Indent Pictures Percept. Speed Op. Span * sig at α < .05; ** sig at α < .01 A stepwise regression analysis revealed that only three factors independently predicted accuracy on the change blindness task: operation span, perceptual speed, and shape memory. The heavy involvement of operation span indicates an important role of working memory in successfully detecting changes in an image. Curiously, measures that are designed to measure spatial ability, such as integrating details, did not show an independent effect. A different set of factors correlated with the latency of change blindness detection, suggesting different mechanisms are involved. Method Our methodology was to administer a broad variety of individual differences tests to a large set of subjects then perform correlational and regression analyses to determine the ability factors that predict change blindness detection. Following the administration of a demographic question- naire (not discussed further), subjects completed a battery of tests: Integrating details (Alderton, 1989); shape memory (Ekstrom, French, Harman, & Dermen, 1976); identical pictures (Ekstrom et al., 1976); perceptual speed (Guilford & Zimmerman, 1947); a change blindness test; and a measure of operations span (Hambrick & Engle, 2002). The change blindness task included 20 trials. On each trial two different versions of a photograph were shown repeatedly in sequence, with a blank gray screen appearing between each pairing of the images. Subjects knew a change appeared in each trial and were allowed to view the images until they detected the change. After detection one version of the image reappeared with a set of 5 regions identified, and subjects selected one region to indicate where the change took place. 85 subjects completed the battery of tests during a 1-hour session for class credit. Data from 8 subjects were discarded due to computer errors. Int. Details References Alderton, D.L. (1989). Development and Evaluation of Integrating Details: A Complex Spatial Problem Solving Test. NPRDC Technical Report 89-6. Ekstrom, R.B., French, J.W., Harman, H.H., & Dermen, D. (1976). Manual for the kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Guilford, J.P., & Zimmerman, W.S. (1947). Guilford- Zimmerman aptitude survey. Orange, CA: Sheridan Psychological Service. Hambrick, D. Z., & Engle, R. W. (2002). Effects of domain knowledge, working memory capacity, and age on cognitive performance: An investigation of the knowledge-is-power hypothesis. Cognitive Psychology, Rensink, R.A., O’Regan, J.K., & Clark, J.J. (1997). To see or not to see: The need for attention to perceive changes in scenes. Psychological Science, 8, 368-373. Simons, D.J. (2000). Currrent approaches to change blindness. Visual Cognition, 7, 1-15. Thurstone, L.L. (1949). SRA Primary abilities. Chicago: Science Research Associates." @default.
• W2769490627 created "2017-12-04" @default.
• W2769490627 creator A5030726706 @default.
• W2769490627 creator A5047120954 @default.
• W2769490627 creator A5085457541 @default.
• W2769490627 date "2004-01-01" @default.
• W2769490627 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W2769490627 title "Finding the Change: The Role of Working Memory and Spatial Ability in Change Blindness Detection" @default.
• W2769490627 cites W2025165232 @default.
• W2769490627 cites W2142796031 @default.
• W2769490627 cites W2170181223 @default.
• W2769490627 cites W274848525 @default.
• W2769490627 hasPublicationYear "2004" @default.
• W2769490627 type Work @default.
• W2769490627 sameAs 2769490627 @default.
• W2769490627 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2769490627 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2769490627 hasAuthorship W2769490627A5030726706 @default.
• W2769490627 hasAuthorship W2769490627A5047120954 @default.
• W2769490627 hasAuthorship W2769490627A5085457541 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConcept C119767625 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConcept C166116840 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConcept C180747234 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConcept C203595873 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConcept C2779913896 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConcept C2780929884 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConceptScore W2769490627C119767625 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConceptScore W2769490627C154945302 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConceptScore W2769490627C15744967 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConceptScore W2769490627C166116840 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConceptScore W2769490627C17744445 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConceptScore W2769490627C180747234 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConceptScore W2769490627C199539241 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConceptScore W2769490627C203595873 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConceptScore W2769490627C2779913896 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConceptScore W2769490627C2780929884 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConceptScore W2769490627C41008148 @default.
• W2769490627 hasConceptScore W2769490627C71924100 @default.
• W2769490627 hasIssue "26" @default.
• W2769490627 hasLocation W27694906271 @default.
• W2769490627 hasOpenAccess W2769490627 @default.
• W2769490627 hasPrimaryLocation W27694906271 @default.
• W2769490627 hasRelatedWork W2053760263 @default.
• W2769490627 hasRelatedWork W2085891416 @default.
• W2769490627 hasRelatedWork W2087316874 @default.
• W2769490627 hasRelatedWork W2126826766 @default.
• W2769490627 hasRelatedWork W2136698868 @default.
• W2769490627 hasRelatedWork W2320235071 @default.
• W2769490627 hasRelatedWork W2758221579 @default.
• W2769490627 hasRelatedWork W2740421887 @default.
• W2769490627 hasVolume "26" @default.
• W2769490627 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2769490627 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2769490627 magId "2769490627" @default.
• W2769490627 workType "article" @default.