Abstract
Sometimes we look but fail to see: our car keys on a cluttered desk, a repeated word in a carefully proofread email, or a motorcycle at an intersection. Wolfe and colleagues present a unifying, mechanistic framework for understanding these “Looked But Failed to See” errors, explaining how such misses arise from natural constraints on human visual processing. Here, we offer a conceptual taxonomy of six distinct ways we might be said to fail to see, and explore: how these relate to processes in Wolfe et al.’s model; how they can be distinguished experimentally; and, why the differences matter.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Journal | i-Perception |
| Volume | 14 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Sep 1 2023 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Keywords
- attention to features/objects
- inattentional blindness
- object recognition
- perception
- visual search
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
- Artificial Intelligence
- Sensory Systems
- Ophthalmology
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Six ways of failing to see (and why the differences matter)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS