Abstract
Faced with the surprising failure to notice large changes to visual scenes (change blindness), many researchers have sought evidence for alternative, nonattentional routes to change detection. A recent article in Psychological Science (Rensink, 2004) proposed a new, nonsensory "mindsight" mechanism to explain the finding that some subjects on some trials reported sensing the presence of a recurring change before they could explicitly identify it and without having a localizable visual experience of change. This mechanism would constitute a previously unknown mode of seeing that, as Rensink suggested, might be akin to a sixth sense. Its existence would have radical implications for the mechanisms underlying conscious visual experience. Provocative claims merit rigorous scrutiny. We rebut the existence of a mindsight mechanism by supporting a more mundane explanation: Some subjects take time to verify their initial conscious detection of changes.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 520-524 |
| Number of pages | 5 |
| Journal | Psychological Science |
| Volume | 16 |
| Issue number | 7 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jul 2005 |
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- General Psychology
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Visual sensing is seeing: Why "mindsight," in hindsight, is blind'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS