Change blindness blindness: The metacognitive error of overestimating change-detection ability

Daniel T. Levin, Nausheen Momen, Sarah B. Drivdahl, Daniel J. Simons

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

Recent research has demonstrated that subjects fail to detect large between-view changes to natural and artificial scenes. Yet, most people (including psychologists) believe that they would detect the changes. We report two experiments documenting this metacognitive error. In Experiment 1, students in a large General Psychology class were asked if they thought they would notice the change in four different situations previously tested by Levin and Simons (1997) and Simons and Levin (1998). Most claimed that they would have noticed even relatively small changes that real observers rarely detected. In Experiment 2, subjects were tested individually and half were asked to predict whether someone else would detect the changes. Subjects again overestimated the degree to which changes would be detected, both by themselves and by others. We discuss possible reasons for these metacognitive errors including distorted beliefs about visual experience, change, and stability.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)397-412
Number of pages16
JournalVisual Cognition
Volume7
Issue number1-3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2000
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Aptitude
Blindness
Psychology
Students
Research
Change Detection
Change Blindness
Experiment

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Cognitive Neuroscience

Cite this

Change blindness blindness : The metacognitive error of overestimating change-detection ability. / Levin, Daniel T.; Momen, Nausheen; Drivdahl, Sarah B.; Simons, Daniel J.

In: Visual Cognition, Vol. 7, No. 1-3, 01.01.2000, p. 397-412.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Levin, Daniel T. ; Momen, Nausheen ; Drivdahl, Sarah B. ; Simons, Daniel J. / Change blindness blindness : The metacognitive error of overestimating change-detection ability. In: Visual Cognition. 2000 ; Vol. 7, No. 1-3. pp. 397-412.
@article{5d3f6f9f6dc74b67b373c1d158e957fe,
title = "Change blindness blindness: The metacognitive error of overestimating change-detection ability",
abstract = "Recent research has demonstrated that subjects fail to detect large between-view changes to natural and artificial scenes. Yet, most people (including psychologists) believe that they would detect the changes. We report two experiments documenting this metacognitive error. In Experiment 1, students in a large General Psychology class were asked if they thought they would notice the change in four different situations previously tested by Levin and Simons (1997) and Simons and Levin (1998). Most claimed that they would have noticed even relatively small changes that real observers rarely detected. In Experiment 2, subjects were tested individually and half were asked to predict whether someone else would detect the changes. Subjects again overestimated the degree to which changes would be detected, both by themselves and by others. We discuss possible reasons for these metacognitive errors including distorted beliefs about visual experience, change, and stability.",
author = "Levin, {Daniel T.} and Nausheen Momen and Drivdahl, {Sarah B.} and Simons, {Daniel J.}",
year = "2000",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/135062800394865",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "7",
pages = "397--412",
journal = "Visual Cognition",
issn = "1350-6285",
publisher = "Psychology Press Ltd",
number = "1-3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Change blindness blindness

T2 - The metacognitive error of overestimating change-detection ability

AU - Levin, Daniel T.

AU - Momen, Nausheen

AU - Drivdahl, Sarah B.

AU - Simons, Daniel J.

PY - 2000/1/1

Y1 - 2000/1/1

N2 - Recent research has demonstrated that subjects fail to detect large between-view changes to natural and artificial scenes. Yet, most people (including psychologists) believe that they would detect the changes. We report two experiments documenting this metacognitive error. In Experiment 1, students in a large General Psychology class were asked if they thought they would notice the change in four different situations previously tested by Levin and Simons (1997) and Simons and Levin (1998). Most claimed that they would have noticed even relatively small changes that real observers rarely detected. In Experiment 2, subjects were tested individually and half were asked to predict whether someone else would detect the changes. Subjects again overestimated the degree to which changes would be detected, both by themselves and by others. We discuss possible reasons for these metacognitive errors including distorted beliefs about visual experience, change, and stability.

AB - Recent research has demonstrated that subjects fail to detect large between-view changes to natural and artificial scenes. Yet, most people (including psychologists) believe that they would detect the changes. We report two experiments documenting this metacognitive error. In Experiment 1, students in a large General Psychology class were asked if they thought they would notice the change in four different situations previously tested by Levin and Simons (1997) and Simons and Levin (1998). Most claimed that they would have noticed even relatively small changes that real observers rarely detected. In Experiment 2, subjects were tested individually and half were asked to predict whether someone else would detect the changes. Subjects again overestimated the degree to which changes would be detected, both by themselves and by others. We discuss possible reasons for these metacognitive errors including distorted beliefs about visual experience, change, and stability.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034041444&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034041444&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/135062800394865

DO - 10.1080/135062800394865

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:0034041444

VL - 7

SP - 397

EP - 412

JO - Visual Cognition

JF - Visual Cognition

SN - 1350-6285

IS - 1-3

ER -