Cited by 1,153Visual perception and processing mechanismsVisual Attention and Saliency DetectionFace Recognition and Perception

Change blindness: Past, present, and future

Open access
Simons, Daniel J., Rensink, Ronald A.·2005·Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Abstract

Change blindness is the striking failure to see large changes that normally would be noticed easily. Over the past decade this phenomenon has greatly contributed to our understanding of attention, perception, and even consciousness. The surprising extent of change blindness explains its broad appeal, but its counterintuitive nature has also engendered confusions about the kinds of inferences that legitimately follow from it. Here we discuss the legitimate and the erroneous inferences that have been drawn, and offer a set of requirements to help separate them. In doing so, we clarify the genuine contributions of change blindness research to our understanding of visual perception and awareness, and provide a glimpse of some ways in which change blindness might shape future research.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tics.2004.11.006

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Most people are poor at noticing large changes in their visual field when the changing object is not the focus of attention.

    “Over 10 years of evidence suggests that the majority of people are remarkably inept at recognizing large changes in their immediate visual field when the object being changed is not the absolute focus of attention (known as “change blindness”) (Simons & Rensink, 2005).”

    From Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health (2010) · cites this paper as Simons & Rensink, 2005

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Grimes, J. (1996) On the failure to detect changes in scenes across saccades. In Perception (Vancouver Studies in Cognitive Science) (Vol. 5) (
  2. Levin, D.T. et al. False predictions about the detectability of unexpected visual changes: The role of beliefs about attention, memory, and the continuity of attended objects in causing change blindness blindness. Conscious. Cogn. (in press)
  3. Ambadar, Z. et al. Deciphering the enigmatic face: The importance of facial dynamics in interpreting subtle facial expressions. Psychol. Sci. (in press)
  4. Simons, D.J. et al. Visual sensing is seeing: Why 'mindsight', in hindsight, is blind. Psychol. Sci. (in press)
  5. Mitroff, S.R. and Simons, D.J. Nothing compares two views: Change blindness results from failures to compare retained information. Percept. Psychophys. (in press)
  6. Simons, D.J. and Mitroff, S. (2001) The role of expectations in change detection and attentional capture. In Vision and Attention (Harris, L.R. and Jenkin, M., eds.), pp. 189-207, Springer-Verlag
  7. Nisbett, R.E. and Masuda, T. (2003) Culture and point of view. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 100, 11163-11170

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Simons, D. J., & Rensink, R. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
Corresponding author
  • Simons, Daniel J.
  • Rensink, Ronald A.
Venue
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-01
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
16-20
ISSN
1364-6613 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2023889744
Cited by
1,153
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 41 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 55 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 64 · 2018: 67 · 2017: 50 · 2016: 41 · 2015: 65 · 2014: 53 · 2013: 50 · 2012: 71
FWCI
3.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Trends in Cognitive Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
Keywords
change blindness, visual perception, attention, consciousness, visual awareness, visual change detection
MeSH terms
Attention, Awareness, Humans, Perceptual Disorders, Photic Stimulation, Visual Perception, Signal Detection, Psychological, Recognition, Psychology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review