↓ Skip to main content

Change blindness for cast shadows in natural scenes: Even informative shadow changes are missed

Overview of attention for article published in Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
Title
Change blindness for cast shadows in natural scenes: Even informative shadow changes are missed
Published in
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, February 2016
DOI 10.3758/s13414-015-1054-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Krista A. Ehinger, Kala Allen, Jeremy M. Wolfe

Abstract

Previous work has shown that human observers discount or neglect cast shadows in natural and artificial scenes across a range of visual tasks. This is a reasonable strategy for a visual system designed to recognize objects under a range of lighting conditions, since cast shadows are not intrinsic properties of the scene-they look different (or disappear entirely) under different lighting conditions. However, cast shadows can convey useful information about the three-dimensional shapes of objects and their spatial relations. In this study, we investigated how well people detect changes to cast shadows, presented in natural scenes in a change blindness paradigm, and whether shadow changes that imply the movement or disappearance of an object are more easily noticed than shadow changes that imply a change in lighting. In Experiment 1, a critical object's shadow was removed, rotated to another direction, or shifted down to suggest that the object was floating. All of these shadow changes were noticed less often than changes to physical objects or surfaces in the scene, and there was no difference in the detection rates for the three types of changes. In Experiment 2, the shadows of visible or occluded objects were removed from the scenes. Although removing the cast shadow of an occluded object could be seen as an object deletion, both types of shadow changes were noticed less often than deletions of the visible, physical objects in the scene. These results show that even informative shadow changes are missed, suggesting that cast shadows are discounted fairly early in the processing of natural scenes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 5%
Luxembourg 1 3%
Unknown 37 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 20%
Researcher 7 18%
Student > Master 7 18%
Other 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 7 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 48%
Computer Science 3 8%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 8 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 May 2016.
All research outputs
#6,246,923
of 24,362,308 outputs
Outputs from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#258
of 1,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,779
of 405,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#10
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,362,308 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,791 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 405,832 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.