July 2013
Volume 13, Issue 9
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   July 2013
Motion-induced blindness without awareness or attention
Author Affiliations
  • Kevin Dieter
    Center for Visual Science & Dept. of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA 14627
  • Duje Tadin
    Center for Visual Science & Dept. of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA 14627\nDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA 14627
  • Joel Pearson
    School of Psychology, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Journal of Vision July 2013, Vol.13, 1101. doi:https://doi.org/10.1167/13.9.1101
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Kevin Dieter, Duje Tadin, Joel Pearson; Motion-induced blindness without awareness or attention. Journal of Vision 2013;13(9):1101. doi: https://doi.org/10.1167/13.9.1101.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

One of the most compelling visual phenomena is motion-induced blindness (MIB; Bonneh et al. 2001), a paradigm in which a distinctly visible stimulus (yellow dot) is made to periodically disappear by its placement within an otherwise coherently moving pattern (rotating blue crosses). MIB has been widely utilized to investigate the neural and cognitive mechanisms responsible for visual awareness. We wondered whether MIB might in fact occur outside of awareness and attention. Following an approach related to that used to study inattention and binocular rivalry (Brascamp & Blake 2012), we probed observers' (n=8) perceptual states after periods during which MIB was presented outside of awareness (suppressed by continuous flash suppression), was unattended (due to a concurrent rapid serial visual presentation task), or both. If the representation of the target fluctuates during this manipulation period (even without awareness and/or attention), it should sometimes be perceptually suppressed after this period due to MIB, resulting in longer reaction times (RT) to report the target item. We found that our manipulations (CFS and/or inattention) had no significant effect on RTs for detecting the target (F3,21=0.08, p=0.97). This suggests that the dynamics of MIB were unaffected by removing awareness, attention, or both. We also devised a baseline condition in which the target dot was physically absent during the manipulation period. In the case of CFS, this condition was perceptually identical to the main condition. Nevertheless, baseline RTs were reliably faster for all of our manipulations, including CFS (F1,7=22.37, p<0.005). Finally, to ensure that target suppression was due to MIB and not CFS, we ran a control in which the normally rotating MIB pattern was stationary and found no effect of CFS (t7=-0.94, p=0.38). Taken together, these results suggest that the phenomenon of motion-induced blindness is unaffected by the removal of awareness, attention, or both.

Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2013


This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.