The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Inattentional Blindness Versus Inattentional Amnesia for Fixated But Ignored Words
Abstract
People often are unable to report the content of ignored information, but it is unknown whether this reflects a complete failure to perceive it (inattentional blindness) or merely that it is rapidly forgotten (inattentional amnesia). Here functional imaging is used to address this issue by measuring brain activity for unattended words. When attention is fully engaged with other material, the brain no longer differentiates between meaningful words and random letters, even when they are looked at directly. These results demonstrate true inattentional blindness for words and show that visual recognition wholly depends on attention even for highly familiar and meaningful stimuli at the center of gaze.
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
Snodgrass, J. G., & Vanderwart, M. (1980) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Learning & Memory · doi:10.1037//0278-7393.6.2.174 · Cited by 5,615
Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review.
MacLeod, C. M. (1991) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.109.2.163 · Cited by 5,500
Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention.
Nilli Lavie, C. (1995) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance · doi:10.1037//0096-1523.21.3.451 · Cited by 2,013
Attention: Some theoretical considerations.
Deutsch, J. A., & Deutsch, D. (1963) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0039515 · Cited by 1,835
Pashler, H. (1997) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/5677.001.0001 · Cited by 1,607
Mack, A., & Rock, I. (1998) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/3707.001.0001 · Cited by 1,593
Feature-based attention influences motion processing gain in macaque visual cortex
Treue, S., & Trujillo, J. C. M. (1999) · Nature · doi:10.1038/21176 · Cited by 1,465
Holender, D. (1986) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00021269 · Cited by 1,274
Strategies and models of selective attention.
Treisman, A. M. (1969) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0027242 · Cited by 1,232
Functional anatomy of a common semantic system for words and pictures
Vandenberghe, R., Price, C., Wise, R., Josephs, O., & Frackowiak, R. S. J. (1996) · Nature · doi:10.1038/383254a0 · Cited by 1,183
Cited by
Distracted and confused? Selective attention under load
Lavie, N. (2005) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2004.12.004 · Cited by 2,102
Effects of Attention and Emotion on Face Processing in the Human Brain
Vuilleumier, P., Armony, J. L., Driver, J., & Dolan, R. J. (2001) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/s0896-6273(01)00328-2 · Cited by 1,664
Self-citationCerebral mechanisms of word masking and unconscious repetition priming
Dehaene, S., Naccache, L., Cohen, L., Bihan, D. L., Mangin, J.-F., Poline, J.-B., & Rivière, D. (2001) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/89551 · Cited by 1,305
Language‐specific tuning of visual cortex? Functional properties of the Visual Word Form Area
Cohen, L., Lehéricy, S., Chochon, F., Lemer, C., Rivaud, S., & Dehaene, S. (2002) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/awf094 · Cited by 1,254
Towards a true neural stance on consciousness
Lamme, V. A. F. (2006) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.09.001 · Cited by 1,149
Metadata
- Authors
- Rees, G., Russell, C., Frith, C. D., & Driver, J.
- Venue
- Science
- Published
- 1999-12-24
- Volume
- 286
- Issue
- 5449
- Pages
- 2504-2507
- ISSN
- 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
- 1095-9203
- OpenAlex
- W2095557583
- Cited by
- 254
- References
- 31
- FWCI
- 5.70
- 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: Inattentional Blindness Versus Inattentional Amnesia for Fixated But Ignored Words. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1126/science.286.5449.2504
- The paper
- Rees, G., Russell, C., Frith, C. D., & Driver, J. (1999). Inattentional Blindness Versus Inattentional Amnesia for Fixated But Ignored Words. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.286.5449.2504
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.
