Join 3,523 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


At least I got the number right
March 19, 2008 8:51 PM   Subscribe

An interesting test with a laudable goal.

Youtube video about change blindness, academic paper (PDF) about it.
posted by aerotive (45 comments total) 4 users marked this as a favorite

 
Ah, a double, I'm afraid.
posted by jedicus at 8:59 PM on March 19, 2008


The tags ruin it. How can you not see THAT?
posted by ColdChef at 9:01 PM on March 19, 2008


I think it's their double not aerotive's.

(also the people behind it are streetteam astroturfing fucks)
posted by cillit bang at 9:02 PM on March 19, 2008


Yes, a double, but a double promoting cycling awareness, at least. Also, I think that last time it was a guy in a gorilla suit.
posted by kaibutsu at 9:04 PM on March 19, 2008


Yeah, actually with the paper and the explanatory video (and, hell, cillit bang's Oh Snap link there), this is a bit better than just the straight youtube link from a few days ago. What the hey, the original was four years old.
posted by cortex at 9:06 PM on March 19, 2008


It's amazing the things we can miss even when we're looking hard... I did a wicked awesome project about change blindness for a high school science fair, it went pretty far but then the judges at the provincial level didn't speak enough English to really understand, but it's cool, I still won five hundred bucks and a few medals.
posted by knystress at 9:10 PM on March 19, 2008


This was ripped off from some else anyway
posted by jeblis at 9:26 PM on March 19, 2008


Yep, jeblis. Besides being really, really, really old, ( like ... from the last millennium) it's also frikken stolen.

This video is © 1999 by Daniel J. Simons. It is provided solely so that individuals can view it. This version of the video may not be used downloaded, saved, copied, reproduced, or used for any other purpose. It is not intended for use in presentations.

I'd say it flamingly obvious that the researchers understood the value of their work and were pretty flamingly adamant that people not rip it off. As a former bike store-manager, and a long term cycling advocate myself, I find this pretty embarrassing. Those very same cycling advocates would have a different attitude about having their precious rides pilfered, I'm guessing.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 9:27 PM on March 19, 2008


This is a fantastic premise for an ad campaign, the only down-side being that when all those change blindness experts give their lectures they'll face a diminishing pool of people who are fooled by their videos. Won't someone please think of the eggheads?!
posted by simra at 9:30 PM on March 19, 2008


Do I win something if I did notice it or does it just mean that cyclists don't have to be afraid of me anymore?
posted by saraswati at 9:52 PM on March 19, 2008


Wasn't this posted and deleted 3 days ago?
posted by mrnutty at 10:19 PM on March 19, 2008


I am so lauding this goal
posted by subgear at 10:25 PM on March 19, 2008


Well, I hadn't seen it before, and neither had my fiancee, and we laughed our asses off. Thanks.
posted by ruddhist at 10:29 PM on March 19, 2008


Well, I coulda sworn it was posted just days ago, but I'll be danged if I can find it.
Perhaps I just failed my own awareness test.
posted by mrnutty at 10:31 PM on March 19, 2008


Lesson: Whilst cycling, don't be moonwalking in a bearsuit. Also, wear reflective shit.
posted by ZaneJ. at 10:40 PM on March 19, 2008


Moonwalking bears have never, presumably, played much of role in our evolution. Has anyone done this with an attractive naked person yet? Two attractive people having sex? Or a gigantic scary spider? Or two attractive people having sex on the back of a gigantic scary spider? I'd like to know whether things change depending on the subject -- whether we are hardwired to notice some things more than other. I'd also like to see two attractive people having sex on the back of a gigantic scary spider.
posted by pracowity at 10:52 PM on March 19, 2008 [5 favorites]


This video is © 1999 by Daniel J. Simons. It is provided solely so that individuals can view it. This version of the video may not be used downloaded, saved, copied, reproduced, or used for any other purpose. It is not intended for use in presentations.

Huh. Not only did I run into this on Stumbleupon yesterday...which has been the case with a large number of recent posts here on Mefi recently, but I also had a HUGE deja vu while viewing it. I remember this from almost a decade ago...shame shame shame!
posted by The Light Fantastic at 10:53 PM on March 19, 2008


This video is © 1999 by Daniel J. Simons. It is provided solely so that individuals can view it. This version of the video may not be used downloaded, saved, copied, reproduced, or used for any other purpose. It is not intended for use in presentations.

From a psychology researcher friend: the video is actually a copy of work from the 1970s by Ulrich Nisser, who had a video where a woman with an umbrella walked through some people in alternating colors doing stuff.

Also, you can't copyright an idea, much less one born of academics, which is largely about sharing your methods. Someone in advertising took an idea obviously from a psychology research project. Big whoop.
posted by mathowie at 11:03 PM on March 19, 2008


They can take their copyright and hide in obscurity for eternity or allow the video to be seen In either event no $ changes hands, but in the latter their work is recognized. What to do....?
posted by caddis at 11:13 PM on March 19, 2008


They passed the ball 28 times and I killed 8 cyclists.
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 11:43 PM on March 19, 2008 [2 favorites]


Psst! aerotive! If you add the InattentionalBlindness tag (which is apparently what this is, not Change Blindness), then this post will be linked with this one from 2004.
posted by mumkin at 12:08 AM on March 20, 2008


It's not an "Awareness Test", it's a "Hey, Schmuck! Pay Attention To This Specific Thing! I Can't Believe You Paid Attention To The Specific Thing, Schmuck! Test".

I hereby resolve to punch the next cyclist or moonwalking bear I see, whichever comes first.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 12:10 AM on March 20, 2008 [5 favorites]


mrnutty: it was posted on March 18th and deleted.
posted by mumkin at 12:11 AM on March 20, 2008


I didn't see this post.
posted by trip and a half at 1:11 AM on March 20, 2008


Mumkin is right. The basketball video is a demonstration of change blindness, not inattentional blindness.

Mods: Is it kosher to link my lab's research page that deals exactly with change blindness and inattentional blindness? It has cool demos!
posted by tickingclock at 1:16 AM on March 20, 2008


Link to it in a comment in this thread, I should add...
posted by tickingclock at 1:16 AM on March 20, 2008


On-topic self links in comments are encouraged, tickingclock.
posted by loquacious at 1:33 AM on March 20, 2008


"Did you see the moonwalking bear?"

DID I!? WHAT THE FUCKING HELL!? One second there's a bunch of retards badly pretending to play basketball and the next there's this WALKING, DANCING BEAR weaving through them like he's not even there. How can they not see a goddamn MOONWALKING BEAR walking right through them!? These people? Do they even actually live in bear country? GO GET YOUR GUN!


Err, I mean - Oh, good. It wasn't just me. I was thinking maybe it was all that LDS I did in the 60s.
posted by loquacious at 1:38 AM on March 20, 2008


I was thinking maybe it was all that LDS I did in the 60s.

You did a lot of Latter-day Saints in the 60s?
posted by juv3nal at 1:53 AM on March 20, 2008


"So, while watching the basketball very carefully, to track just that one thing in a field of moving people, did you happen to notice one guy, in the same color as the black team, doing something a little unusual?"

Why, no. No, I didn't. And if I HAD noticed him, I would have gotten the number of passes wrong.
posted by Malor at 2:01 AM on March 20, 2008


That bear is terrible at moonwalking.
posted by the littlest brussels sprout at 2:11 AM on March 20, 2008


You can't miss the BEAR!

/weeds
posted by Sparx at 3:26 AM on March 20, 2008


Bear suits are not nearly as funny as gorilla suits.
posted by Faint of Butt at 3:33 AM on March 20, 2008


I saw the bear, but didn't notice that I did until the replay. And I only counted 11 because I got distracted by the bear without realizing. A double-fail?
posted by Silly Ashles at 4:02 AM on March 20, 2008


You cannot be aware of everything all the time? Well, no shit.
posted by crossoverman at 4:12 AM on March 20, 2008


The basketball video is a demonstration of change blindness, not inattentional blindness.

No, it's inattentional blindness. (But I think that's what you meant to say.) Meanwhile, I really don't see how this is stolen — it's a TFL remake of the same idea, surely? (Hard to be 100% certain since the Simons lab webpage is such a usability disaster.)
posted by game warden to the events rhino at 4:17 AM on March 20, 2008


"It's easy to miss something you're not looking for."

Oh God... I feel so... so...

human.
posted by Mike D at 4:46 AM on March 20, 2008


Scientists who put up copyright notices like that deserve to become textbook publishers going from conference to conference buying free drinks for real scientists who think their idiots but nonetheless enjoy a drink.
posted by srboisvert at 5:25 AM on March 20, 2008


New to me.
I laughed.
But I still hit a coupla Cub Scouts this morning.
posted by Dizzy at 6:13 AM on March 20, 2008


STOP

STOP IT

JESUS CHRIST STOP IT

posted by East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94 at 6:40 AM on March 20, 2008 [1 favorite]


Yep, jeblis. Besides being really, really, really old, ( like ... from the last millennium) it's also frikken stolen.

4) Profit!
posted by Ogre Lawless at 2:00 PM on March 20, 2008


Actually, I had seen another video like this before, and was looking for the bear, and still missed it. Could be because I was looking for a gorilla.
posted by OldReliable at 2:43 PM on March 20, 2008


Ditto OldReliable. Some interesting things on second viewing, though: the blackness of the bear is very much like the blackness of the black-shirted team's shirts. This is relevant, because it's been implied we can basically ignore the black-shirted team. Also, when the bear's moving through the crowd, the white team passes their ball a little away from him.

It would be interesting to perform the experiment with a white-suited or grey-suited "bear", or some more interesting thing doing the move-through: a fully-armed soldier, a naked woman, a child significantly smaller than the basketball players but dressed like them, or a well-known and recognizable figure with a distinctive movement pattern such as Charlie Chaplin.
posted by aeschenkarnos at 5:49 PM on March 20, 2008


Someone in advertising took an idea obviously from a psychology research project. Big whoop.

Oh, please. How much effort does it really take to properly attribute the research which one then co-opts for commercial gain? Far less than the revenue stream generated by just randomly swiping the work of other more talented investigators , I'd say.

Not than anyone with any sense of fair play will ever win the argument around here that perhaps everything ever created in the entire history of the universe isn't necessarily the de-facto property of any self-satisfied hipster with five bucks, a Moleskin, and a gargantuan ego; who happens to spot a potential brand- building solution.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 9:40 PM on March 25, 2008


I believe you mean a Moleskine, PareidoliaticBoy. You're diluting the brand.
posted by mumkin at 10:09 PM on March 25, 2008


« Older Jayci is ten years old. She's about to die of an i...  |  Birds start singing in the spr... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments