Wright Timothy J, Boot Walter R, Morgan Chelsea S
Department of Psychology, Florida State University, 1107W. Call St., Tallahassee, FL 32306, United States.
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2013 Sep;144(1):6-11. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.04.018. Epub 2013 Jun 3.
Research on inattentional blindness (IB) has uncovered few individual difference measures that predict failures to detect an unexpected event. Notably, no clear relationship exists between primary task performance and IB. This is perplexing as better task performance is typically associated with increased effort and should result in fewer spare resources to process the unexpected event. We utilized a psychophysiological measure of effort (pupillary response) to explore whether differences in effort devoted to the primary task (multiple object tracking) are related to IB. Pupillary response was sensitive to tracking load and differences in primary task error rates. Furthermore, pupillary response was a better predictor of conscientiousness than primary task errors; errors were uncorrelated with conscientiousness. Despite being sensitive to task load, individual differences in performance and conscientiousness, pupillary response did not distinguish between those who noticed the unexpected event and those who did not. Results provide converging evidence that effort and primary task engagement may be unrelated to IB.
对无意视盲（IB）的研究几乎没有发现能够预测未能察觉到意外事件的个体差异指标。值得注意的是，主要任务表现与无意视盲之间不存在明确的关系。这令人困惑，因为更好的任务表现通常与更多的努力相关联，并且应该会导致用于处理意外事件的备用资源减少。我们采用了一种努力程度的心理生理测量指标（瞳孔反应）来探究在主要任务（多目标追踪）上投入的努力差异是否与无意视盲有关。瞳孔反应对追踪负荷和主要任务错误率的差异很敏感。此外，与主要任务错误相比，瞳孔反应是尽责性更好的预测指标；错误与尽责性不相关。尽管瞳孔反应对任务负荷、表现和尽责性的个体差异敏感，但它并不能区分注意到意外事件的人和未注意到意外事件的人。研究结果提供了一致的证据，表明努力和主要任务投入可能与无意视盲无关。
