Cargando…
Is It Implicit Detection or Perception During Change Blindness?
PURPOSE: Implicit detection differs from implicit perception. The former includes implicit registration, localisation, identification and comparison of an object. Implicit comparison is not necessary for implicit perception, and should not involve the identification or localisation of objects. While...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7700086/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33262667 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S280566 |
Sumario: | PURPOSE: Implicit detection differs from implicit perception. The former includes implicit registration, localisation, identification and comparison of an object. Implicit comparison is not necessary for implicit perception, and should not involve the identification or localisation of objects. While many studies have reported evidence of implicit detection in change blindness, they may, in fact, have only observed implicit perception. In this study, we aimed to find out whether there is implicit detection or perception during the change blindness period. METHODS: In Experiments 1 and 2, we used a simple change detection paradigm, coupled with a speeded attribute discrimination task. Reaction times (RTs) and accuracy of the participants were measured for the speeded attribute discrimination task. We compared differences in RT and accuracy of the invalid and congruent cue trials to find evidence for implicit detection. Invalid trials referred to stimuli where the appearance of the cue does not change, whereas congruent trials involved cued objects with the same attributes as that of the change object. In Experiment 3, a one-shot change detection experiment was conducted, where subjects were required to report whether the objects were the same or different as quickly as possible. We compared the differences in RTs between trials in which the stimulus exhibited a change but participants reported “same” (change blindness trails) and trials in which the stimulus exhibited no change and participants reported “same” (baseline trials), to find evidence for implicit perception. RESULTS: In Experiments 1 and 2, the difference in accuracy and RTs under invalid and congruent conditions was not significant. We did not observe a validity effect as evidence for implicit localisation or a congruency effect as evidence for identification. In Experiment 3, the RTs were longer in the change blindness relative no-change trials, which indicated that there was implicit perception. CONCLUSION: The results of this study showed that there was no evidence supporting implicit detection in colour or orientation as a single or a combination of features. However, we report evidence for implicit perception during the change blindness period. Change may be implicitly perceived, but not located or identified before there is conscious detection. |
---|