Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics

, Volume 81, Issue 1, pp 1–11 | Cite as

Processing without noticing in inattentional blindness: A replication of Moore and Egeth (1997) and Mack and Rock (1998)

  • Katherine WoodEmail author
  • Daniel J. Simons
Registered Reports and Replications


Surreptitious online measures can reveal the processing of stimuli that people do not report noticing or cannot describe. People seem to glean everything from low-level Gestalt grouping information to semantic meaning from unattended and unreported stimuli, and this information seems capable of influencing performance and of priming semantic judgments. Moore and Egeth (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 339–352, 1997) provided evidence that judgments about the lengths of two lines were influenced by the grouping of background dots, even when subjects did not notice the pattern the dots formed. Mack and Rock (1998) reported that subjects could be primed to complete a stem with a word to which they were inattentionally blind. In this registered report, we replicated these two classic findings using large online samples (Ns = 260 and 448), finding support for the influence of grouping despite inattentional blindness, but not for word-stem priming.


Attention: Divided Attention and Inattention implicit/explicit memory attention 


Supplementary material

13414_2018_1629_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (268 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 268 kb)


  1. Cartwright-Finch, U., & Lavie, N. (2007). The role of perceptual load in inattentional blindness. Cognition, 102, 321–340. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Davies, Mark. (n.d.) The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): 560 million words, 1990–present. Available online at
  3. DeSchepper, B., & Treisman, A. (1996). Visual memory for novel shapes: Implicit coding without attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 27–47. Google Scholar
  4. Goldin, G., & Darlow, A. (2013). TurkGate (Version 0.4.0) [Software]. Available from
  5. Henry, L., & Wickham, H. (2017). purrr: Functional programming tools (R package version 0.2.4). Retrieved from
  6. Holendar, D. (1986). Semantic activation without conscious identification in dichotic listening, parafoveal vision, and visual masking: A survey and appraisal. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 9, 1–23, disc. 23–66. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lamy, D., Segal, H., & Ruderman, L. (2006). Grouping does not require attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 68, 17–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Mack, A., & Rock, I. (1998). Inattentional blindness. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mack, A., Tang, B., Tuma, R., Kahn, S., & Rock, I. (1992). Perceptual organization and attention. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 475–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mitroff, S. R., & Scholl, B. J. (2005). Forming and updating object representations without awareness: Evidence from motion-induced blindness. Vision Research, 45, 961–967. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Moore, C., Grosjean, M., & Lleras, A. (2003). Using inattentional blindness as an operational definition of unattended: The case of surface completion. Visual Cognition, 10, 299–318. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Moore, C. M., & Egeth, H. (1997). Perception without attention: Evidence of grouping under conditions of inattention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 339–352. Google Scholar
  13. Most, S. B., Simons, D. J., Scholl, B. J., Jimenez, R., Clifford, E., & Chabris, C. F. (2001). How not to be seen: the contribution of similarity and selective ignoring to sustained inattentional blindness. Psychological Science, 12, 9–17. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Neisser, U., & Becklen, R. (1975). Selective looking: Attending to visually specified events. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 480–494. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 3.5.1). Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from Google Scholar
  16. Rosenthal, O., & Humphreys, G. W. (2010). Perceptual organization without perception: The subliminal learning of global contour. Psychological Science, 21, 1751–1758. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Russell, C., & Driver, J. (2005). New indirect measures of “inattentive” visual grouping in a change-detection task. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 606–623. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Simons, D. J. (2000). Attentional capture and inattentional blindness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 147–155. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Simons, D. J., & Chabris, C. F. (1999). Gorillas in our midst: Sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception, 28, 1059–1074. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Stothart, C. R., Boot, W. R., & Simons, D. J. (2015). Using Mechanical Turk to assess the effects of age and spatial proximity on inattentional blindness. Collabra: Psychology, 1(1), 2:1–7.
  21. Ward, E. J., & Scholl, B. J. (2015). Inattentional blindness reflects limitations on perception, not memory: Evidence from repeated failures of awareness. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 722–727. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Wickham, H. (2009). ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wickham, H. (2018). stringr: Simple, consistent wrappers for common string operations (R package version 1.3.0). Retrieved from
  24. Wickham, H., Francois, R., Henry, H., & Müller, K. (2017). dplyr: A grammar of data manipulation (R package version 0.7.4). Retrieved from
  25. Wickham, H., & Henry, L. (2018). tidyr: Easily tidy data with “spread()” and “gather()” functions (R package version 0.8.0). Retrieved from
  26. Wolfe, J. M. (1999). Inattentional amnesia. In V. Coltheart (Ed.), Fleeting memories: Cognition of brief visual stimuli (pp. 71–94). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  27. Wood, K., & Simons, D. J. (2017). Selective attention in inattentional blindness: Selection is specific but suppression is not. Collabra: Psychology, 3(1), 19. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of IllinoisChampaignUSA

Personalised recommendations