E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSNo, you really can't focus on the road while you're yakking away on your cell phone -- and a new study explains why.
This new research builds on the well-known "Gorillas in Our Midst" experiment, a staple of Psych 101 courses. Researchers say they can now explain why many people fail to see a "gorilla" who unexpectedly appears in a video when their attention is focused on another task -- it's because they have lower "working memory capacity," a measure of the ability to keep your brain tuned into many things at once.
In the study, 197 psychology students (ages 18 to 35) watched a 24-second video of six people playing basketball. They were asked to count the number of bounce passes and aerial passes made by the black-shirted team. Twelve seconds into the video, an actor dressed in a gorilla suit walks into the hoops game, pounds his chest, then leaves. The "gorilla" appears on screen for eight seconds.
After viewing the segment, researchers asked participants for the two different pass counts and whether they noticed anything unusual in the clip. Slightly more than half the participants, or 58 percent, noticed the ape but 42 percent did not.
Why the gorilla is 'invisible'
Scientists have wondered why roughly half the people who watch this video see the hairy beast while others completely miss it. Psychologists call this effect "inattentional blindness." It's an inability to see something, typically an unexpected object, when your attention is wrapped up in something else.
"Tasks that require a lot of attention, concentration or mental effort could be more likely to raise the risk of inattentional blindness," says Janelle Seegmiller, a doctoral student in psychology at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City and the study's lead author. (This research will appear in the May issue of the Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition.)
The gorilla study "demonstrates that people are more likely to miss unexpected events that are in their visual field when they are cognitively stressed as well showing that people with lower working memory capacity may also be more susceptible to missing them," she points out.
While completing difficult tasks, people with higher working memory capacity can keep more information in their minds. And these folks are more likely to see the gorilla. That's because they "have more attentional resources allowing them to use any 'leftover' resources to monitor the environment and notice the gorilla," explains Seegmiller.
In fact, researchers found that among participants who were most accurate in counting basketball passes in the video -- the original task at hand -- 67 percent of those with "high working memory capacity" observed the gorilla but only 36 percent with "low working memory capacity" did.
Although psychologists currently believe that your working memory capacity is not something that can be trained or dramatically changed, you're not doomed to miss things right before your eyes if yours is low. The trick is to have "leftover" attention so you notice the unexpected.
Not glimpsing a gorilla in a lab video is one thing, but imagine what you could be missing out on in real life. "We could find similar results with driving and unexpected events (like a car in front of you quickly breaking)," says Seegmiller. Or people having cell phone conversations while behind the wheel -- then sailing through a stop sign. Or looking but not seeing another vehicle and causing a fender-bender.
Missing the gorilla is a problem of processing information and focusing a hard-working brain. It's helpful to filter out information that's irrelevant to a task, which helps you pay attention to what's important. But this can also be harmful when something unanticipated isn't noticed and should have been.
Want more weird health news? Find The Body Odd on Facebook.
Want more weird health news? Find The Body Odd on Facebook.
Leave a Comment:
Is it at all possible that some people may have developed an inverse personality trait?
Sometimes called "selective memory". They see and hear only what suits them. Another natural characteristic is referred to as built in bias. Just a thought.
Yeah, I hate when a car suddenly breaks in front of me. So inconvenient with all the pieces flying everywhere.
You mean like spotting the misspelled word in the article, while emailing and talking on the phone.
You mean the "braking" news?
Maybe a car really did "break"! I think I might notice that!
This doesn't convince me. Show me where people having a conversation and watching the video don't see the gorilla. When I'm driving, I seldom try to count bounce and aerial passes.
I agree. When I do talk on the phone while driving (always with a hands-free device), my driving is what's most important and uppermost in my mind. People often ask me if I'm still there (or I have to ask them to repeat something) because when traffic suddenly gets thick, or someone weaves or drives aggressively I instantly stop paying attention to the conversation (don't listen, don't talk, or even stop talking in mid sentence) and focus completely on the road situation. I don't think about this and then do it, it just happens automatically.
On the other hand, if someone thinks the conversation is more important than driving, then totally different results may accur, of course. If I need to have that kind of conversation (say medical or work related) I will always stop the car and then have the conversation.
I have also had people step off the sidewalk right into the path of my car while texting, so it's obvious that plenty of people do not properly prioritize their activities in their own mind. Don't know if this is a personality trait, or if it can be taught.
Ummm. No.
Divided attention is exactly that. Divided. Not 100%.
Drunk drivers never think they are drunk, either.
Then why don't we have the driver's area encased in soundproof glass, so they cannot be distracted by music or their passengers? I don't know a single person who refuses to engage in conversation with a passenger because it might cause a distraction. This is no different from using a hands-free device, but is vastly different from driving drunk. I have never had a conversation that prevented me from walking straight, responding to instincts, speaking clearly, or blurred my vision, all things which alcohol does. Completely different.
What happens that's different in the passenger case is that passengers "moderate the conversational flow", or in lay language, stop talking, when things get busy on the road. This is especially true when your passenger is also an experienced driver, at which point, they will generally shift from being a distraction (talking to you) to being a help (another set of eyes). This is also part of why children in the car can be so much worse than adults. Children don't know when to moderate their demands for attention based on road conditions. So, it is in fact, different from a hands free device because the person at the other end of the phone cannot see the road. Additionally, cell phones are not as clear as face to face (or side by side) conversations, and so you actually need to pay more attention to a conversation via phone, which only makes these effects worse.
That's when I tell my children, "I have to concentrate on driving now." I do the same with whomever I'm having a conversation with, whether on the phone or in person. Just like I turn off the radio in heavy rain or icy conditions, revert to 10 and 2 position when it's windy out, and lower my speed when I see children playing near the street. That's all part of being a good driver. You adjust to the conditions you are driving in. A person knows when he is paying attention to the road or not.
What if the gorilla had worn green? The human eye is most sensitive to green.
Yes, you've proven that people have different capacities. This indicates that some must put forth effort and be consciously aware of their surroundings. FACT: Drivers have talked to passengers in their vehicles ever since cars have been around, that is NOT new. FACT: For most of that time, Phones were in Homes not in cars, although there was that CB-Radio around way before.
For some drivers, even all , should REMEMBER they are not in their HOUSE talking on the phone. People can talk and do other things, but they must distinguish WHERE they are, while on the Cell-Phone.
I'm still old-school about Texting, unless they can text behind their back without looking and read street signs at the same time. As they say sime should not even chew gum and walk at the same time. REALIZE your own abilities. Call numbers, by Voice-Commands. Texting is not like Talking, when driving a car, it is more fatal.
Talking to people in the car can be bad, especially for very distracted young drivers. Having many teens in a car increases the accident rate a lot.
But, there is an advantage compared to talking on a hands free cell, the person you're talking too is actually in the car, they know the situation you're in and can adjust their conversation accordingly. I don't talk to my mother is she's merging in traffic, passing a car, or in very heavy traffic. Also, car conversations from my own experience tend to be more erratic, not those constant stream you get when people are talking on cells.
Also, when listening to conversations that come from the outside, it becomes akin to daydreaming, it pulls you out of the car. You response time becomes a lot more sluggish. And, since the person calling doesn't know what your doing, they won't stop talking no matter what situation your in.
I find hands free is just marginally better than using a cell, mainly because both hands can stay on the wheel. You can voice dial, so its not like you needed to take your eyes off the road; its the conversation itself that's the killer...
Um it's called multi-tasking not multi-thinking or multi-focusing it is so that tasks can be accomplished in a short amount of time... some people just don't get it, maybe it's because they can't multi-task and others can... jealousy is green right??
Did they ask how many of these people ignored the gorilla because their mind immediately filed it away as "annoying team mascot" and therafter DELIBERATELY disregarded it? Aren't we used to that sort of showmanship at sports events? Show me a supermarket sequence or a nail salon or even out on a public street where they pull the same stunt and lets see THEN how people take it.
yes multi tasking and concentrating are two different things
I talk on the phone at work and write letters and or do my spread sheets.
oh and I can wash my hands and whistle at the same time.... only 97.3333333% of the surveyed population can do that. I wonder, can I get the government to give me a grant for that???
After all some moron paid to get that information!!!!
The brain can multitask (which means in computer term would be task interleaving) when tasks can be put on autopilot like washing your hands and whistling. These on no concentration tasks generally, unless someone asks you to wash you hand in a particular way, or whistle a difficult tune you've never heard before.
But, for tasks like writing, talking on the phone, and looking at numbers on a spreadsheet and understanding them, the brain can't truly do any of them all at once. The brain actually focuses in succession on each tasks. The brain tasks switches, some can switch quicker than other (and when your younger this is easier), but there is a very significant loss of efficiency when you do this. Its been proven many times that doing many things at once leads to decrease in both quality and performance of each individual tasks. So, its much better to work 20 min on A, then 20 min on B then 20 min on C, then doing those 3 at the same time.
the brain task switches.
There's an important difference in certain tasks though. We can generally perform multiple motor acts at once (walking and whistling) and multiple perceptual acts at once (seeing and hearing) but there is also what psychologists refer to as a "central bottleneck" (look up "psychological refractory period or PRP). Essentially, you can only make one decision at a time. With practice that bottleneck can be shortened, but even with lots of practice, it can never be completely eliminated. In fact, though, we rarely realize how many little decisions we make every day (yellow light, slam on the brakes or speed up?) and each of those is limited to a slow, serial process. If you are thinking about a conversation and really paying attention to it, you are not really paying attention to the road, and by the time you shift your attention back to the road, you could be hundreds of feet further along... the difference between making that light and running it, slamming into someone else.
The Gorilla was unrelated to the task, so even if they noticed why would they mention?
Watching for hazards while driving is a related task.
I've seen lots of people miss seeing a motorcycle while turning BEFORE CELL PHONES WERE EVEN INVENTED.
I guess you could affiliate radios, turn-signals, gear shifting, rolling down a window, monitoring the gas gauge, etc. as multi-tasking too as they place drivers in greater risk when the focus is not on the road.
Keeping ones eyes on the road is the necessary task, so it doen't much matter about other distractions until studies take this into account.
Hey, here's an idea on how to balance the budget, quit spending money on stupid studies!
Having ridden motorcycles for a large part of my driving, I can attest to the fact that there are 4 types of drivers:
1. Those that don't see motorcycles at all.
2. Those that see motorcycles but ignore them (couldn't hurt me).
3. Those that see motorcycles and aim at them.
4. Those that ride or have ridden motorcycles.
People should consider - which type are they?
More distractions means more drivers that move into the first category.
Having seen a lot of motorcyclists do stupid things on the road because if they get hit, it's my fault anyway, I pay particular attention to them. They have a higher tendency to weave through traffic and not ever use their turn signals. I'm not sure why. If I were on a vehicle that left me completely exposed in the event of a crash, I think I would be even MORE careful than usual.
Because it's never the irresponsible "I'm cooler than you" jerk on the motorcycle that is wrong, right?
I always forget that traffic laws like speed limits and lane usuage don't apply to motorcycles. Duh, stupid me in my car thinking that a jerk on a motorcycle who goes 90mph, while weaving in/out of three lanes of rush hour traffic, cutting up the center line or passing on the shoulders, deserves what he/she gets when he/she crashes. Nope, not his/her fault. It's my fault for being in a car.
Having grown up with a nurse, I've heard way too many stories about torn up bikers to have sympathy for the irresponsible riders. When you eat dinner while listening to stories about guys with road rash down to the shinbone, you tend to lose a little bit of tolerance for such idiocy. I know not all bikers are that way. My dad rides very responsibly. But those who do tend to be those who complain about drivers not watching out for them. What is it about not carrying liability that makes people think they are invincible? Like the pedestrians who dart across the road without waiting for a gap in traffic. Me taking the blame won't keep you alive.
As always, I am very impressed by the people who know more about the subject that the people who have actually studied it. Unsupported statements always impress me.
Me too!
Did you know that 47.21% of all statements are unsupported?
I work at a university and have seen students walk into doors while texting. I was once nearly hit while walking in the crosswalk with the walk light, by a driver who was looking for something on his seat. I know few people who can do several things at the same time and do them WELL, and when you think of it, why do this at all? The real problem is one of overload. Instead of slowing down, we speed up and take on multiple tasks like fools. Some years ago I was walking along a sea wall near the ocean, and saw a toddler coming towards me. This child was about 2 or 3 years old, wearing pj's. I picked him up and asked him where he lived. He didn't speak, but pointed at a house up the street. I took him there, knocked on the door, and mommy answered. She had a phone to her ear, a plate of food in her hand, and hadn't noticed her kid going out the door. Instead of interrupting her cell phone yakking to thank me, she took the child from me with her other hand and wordlessly shut the door. Life can be nuts, and much of this craziness is of our own doing.
Dude, I think I would have knocked again and bit**-slapped the mother when she opened the door again! And then called child protective services.
Texting is entirely different from talking. I don't have to be looking at my phone to talk on it. In fact, that generally makes talking on it more difficult. I absolutely don't text while I drive, but I often talk to people while I drive. (They are usually passengers in the vehicle with me.) It doesn't take a scientific study to figure out if you are looking at the keyboard on your phone, you are not watching the road.
Isn't that the definition of "focus?" The devotion of one's attention to a single thing or task? If you're multi-tasking, you are not focused - by definition.
This reinforces what is obvious. What's not mentioned is attitude. The more likely someone says, "oh, good enough" and not sweat the 'small' stuff, the more likely they are not going to see the Gorilla. Don't get me wrong, I'm NOT saying we should sweat the small stuff. It's just like in the bible when it says something about 'say yes when you mean yes and no when you mean no, anything else is intentionally causing confusion' (that's my interpretation). As they say you have to serve someone for the greater good or for the greater bad. What's your attitude? Do you have something negative to say about this? Or are you looking at the positive parts?
In my opinion the psychologists are wrong in believing that one's working memory capacity is not something that can be trained, …… but they are right about it being something that can not be dramatically changed.
The extent of one's working memory capacity is an "age dependent" nurtured trait. Meaning, one must "train" (program) their subconscious mind during their adolescent years (the younger the better) to react to "different gorillas in the room" …. because the older one gets the more difficult, if not impossible, it becomes to dramatically change the original nurturing (programming) of their subconscious mind.
This is actually a poorly researched part of this article. Torkel Klingberg and colleagues have shown that memory can be improved, and that brain regions involved with working memory capacity modulate their activity after training: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=%22Klingberg%20T%22%5BAuthor%5D
In general humans capacity tends to be around "7 plus or minus 2" chunks of information, this number is not fixed as it depends on the complexity of the information, the speed at which it is presented and a host of other factors. And it is true that some people tend to have smaller or larger capacities when tested across a large number of tasks, but these capacities can be improved through training, especially in people with low working memory capacities.
I agree that specific tasks can be improved upon through training (nurturing) but after a certain age in their development I am really not sure that one’s working memory capacity can be improved upon from say 5 “chunks of information” being processed concurrently to say 7 or more “chunks of information” being processed concurrently.
It is my opinion that by one’s late teens or early adult years their “root neural network” that determines their “capacity number” is pretty much fixed and not easily enhanced. Enhancing said “capacity” is akin to adding an additional Circuit Breaker to a full Breaker Box in one’s home long after all the electrical wiring has been completed. One can add an additional “capacity” to an existing Circuit but the two process must “share the load”, meaning the two can not run concurrently.
Just my learned opinion, of course.
As someone whose best friend was permanently injured when a driver talking on a cell phone rear-ended her at a stop light, I'd like to ask please, just don't take the risk. You may think it's negligible, you may think you can handle it. Just don't. If you simply can't postpone that conversation, pull off the road for a few minutes.
Someone whose life used to include cycling, skiing, and salsa dancing had to cut back her work to part time, because she's no longer comfortable sitting at a desk for 8 hours a day. Think of her when your phone rings.
I tend to disagree with this at least in my case. From the time I started driving when I was 16 I used a radio in the car as an amateur radio operator. I learned to time share between that and driving. I taught my brain that driving was priority one and when I started to use a cell phone in the car I carried that over to it.
Undoubtedly this is not true for many, I consider myself generally in the minority. People regard a phone as some kind of god that must be worshiped, meaning answered and responded to sans everything else. Can you ignore a ringing phone if you are doing something more important? If not then you need to reevaluate your priorities!
You know the old saying, "he can't walk and chew gum at the same time" well I am sure that is true for some people. It is just ashame that those who are able to successfully multi-task are punished because of those who can't.