The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
What You See Is What You Set: Sustained Inattentional Blindness and the Capture of Awareness.
Abstract
This article reports a theoretical and experimental attempt to relate and contrast 2 traditionally separate research programs: inattentional blindness and attention capture. Inattentional blindness refers to failures to notice unexpected objects and events when attention is otherwise engaged. Attention capture research has traditionally used implicit indices (e.g., response times) to investigate automatic shifts of attention. Because attention capture usually measures performance whereas inattentional blindness measures awareness, the 2 fields have existed side by side with no shared theoretical framework. Here, the authors propose a theoretical unification, adapting several important effects from the attention capture literature to the context of sustained inattentional blindness. Although some stimulus properties can influence noticing of unexpected objects, the most influential factor affecting noticing is a person's own attentional goals. The authors conclude that many--but not all--aspects of attention capture apply to inattentional blindness but that these 2 classes of phenomena remain importantly distinct.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Posner, M. I. (1980) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/00335558008248231 · Cited by 9,670 · cited 4×
“However, when the cue is misleading, response times are slowed (e.g., Colegate, Hoffman, & Eriksen, 1973; Eriksen & Hoffman, 1972; Jonides, 1981; Posner, 1980; Posner, Snyder, & Davidson, 1980).”
InfluentialGorillas in our midst: sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events
Simons, D. J., & Chabris, C. F. (1999) · Perception · doi:10.1068/p281059 · Cited by 3,181
Self-citationEmotion drives attention: Detecting the snake in the grass.
Öhman, A., Flykt, A., & Esteves, F. (2001) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.130.3.466 · Cited by 2,542
Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings
Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., & Johnston, J. C. (1992) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance · doi:10.1037/0096-1523.18.4.1030 · Cited by 2,487
Contextual Cueing: Implicit Learning and Memory of Visual Context Guides Spatial Attention
Chun, M. M., & Jiang, Y. (1998) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1006/cogp.1998.0681 · Cited by 1,959
Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: A zoom lens model
Eriksen, C. W., & St. James, J. D. (1986) · Perception & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/bf03211502 · Cited by 1,907
Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: an attentional blink?
Raymond, J. E., Shapiro, K. L., & Arnell, K. M. (1992) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance · doi:10.1037/0096-1523.18.3.849 · Cited by 1,649
Perceptual selectivity for color and form
Theeuwes, J. (1992) · Perception & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/bf03211656 · Cited by 1,649
Why visual attention and awareness are different
Lamme, V. A. F. (2003) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(02)00013-x · Cited by 1,172
Priming of pop-out: I. Role of features
Maljkovic, V., & Nakayama, K. (1994) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03209251 · Cited by 1,107
Cited by
A taxonomy of external and internal attention.
Chun, M. M., Golomb, J. D., & Turk-Browne, N. B. (2011) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100427 · Cited by 1,472
Principles of sensorimotor learning
Wolpert, D. M., Diedrichsen, J., & Flanagan, J. R. (2011) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn3112 · Cited by 1,391
Cognition does not affect perception: Evaluating the evidence for “top-down” effects
Firestone, C., & Scholl, B. J. (2016) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x15000965 · Cited by 1,200
Self-citationRepresenting multiple objects as an ensemble enhances visual cognition
Alvarez, G. A. (2011) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2011.01.003 · Cited by 586
The many meanings/aspects of emotion: definitions, functions, activation, and regulation
Izard, C. E. (2010) · Emotion Review · doi:10.1177/1754073910374661 · Cited by 574
Metadata
- Authors
- Most, S. B., Scholl, B. J., Clifford, E. R., & Simons, D. J.
- Venue
- Psychological Review
- Published
- 2005
- Volume
- 112
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 217-242
- ISSN
- 0033-295X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1471
- OpenAlex
- W2104657862
- Cited by
- 521
- References
- 17
- FWCI
- 31.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: What You See Is What You Set: Sustained Inattentional Blindness and the Capture of Awareness. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/0033-295x.112.1.217
- The paper
- Most, S. B., Scholl, B. J., Clifford, E. R., & Simons, D. J. (2005). What You See Is What You Set: Sustained Inattentional Blindness and the Capture of Awareness. Psychological Review. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.112.1.217
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
