Motion induced blindness...

(copied from RAS) - amazing!

"keep our eyes moving and our head on a swivel"



Subject: Motion Induced Blindness

When driving keep your eyes moving, checking mirrors, looking to the
left and right and this blinding affect is minimized.

(If you don't believe those yellow dots are not disappearing, have
someone stand by you and NOT stare at the green dot.)

Motion Induced Blindness

This is frightening! It works exactly like it says, and is one major
reason people in cars can look right at you (when you're on a
motorcycle or bicycle)---AND NOT SEE YOU. From a former Naval Aviator.
This is a great illustration of what we were taught about scanning
outside the cockpit when I went through training back in the '50s. We
were told to scan the horizon for a short distance, stop momentarily,
and repeat the process. I can remember being told why this was the
most effective technique to locate other aircraft. It was emphasized
(repeatedly) to NOT fix your gaze for more than a couple of seconds on
any single object. The instructors, some of whom were WWII veterans
with years of experience, instructed us to continually "keep our eyes
moving and our head on a swivel" because this was the best way to
survive, not only in combat, but from peacetime hazards (like a midair
collision) as well. We basically had to take the advice on faith
(until we could experience for ourselves) because the technology to
demonstrate it didn't exist at that time. Click on the link below
for a demonstration ...

http://www.msf-usa.org/motion.html

--
Duncan.

Dave Doe writes:

This is frightening! It works exactly like it says, and is one major
reason people in cars can look right at you (when you're on a
motorcycle or bicycle)---AND NOT SEE YOU.

No, the two phenomena are totally unrelated.

The demonstration shows the fatigue of the visual system (notably the retina)
when presented with a constant, unchanging stimulus. However, this fatigue
never occurs in ordinary life, because nobody stares carefully at a single
spot without moving his eyes and without a change in the scene for thirty
seconds at a time. It certainly never occurs while driving or operating a
vehicle, and is hard to elicit under other than laboratory conditions.

The reason drivers do not seem to see motorcycles or bicycles is very
different. They actually _do_ see these things, but they unconsciously regard
them as not important to their own safety, so they ignore them. They notice
cars because collision with a car is potentially harmful, but not motorcycles
or especially not bicycles because these are not potential "threats." It's a
simple example of awareness being directed towards the things that are
perceived as important. It has no connection to the visual fatigue described
above at all.

On Apr 3, 6:09*am, Mxsmanic wrote:

The reason drivers do not seem to see motorcycles or bicycles is very
different. They actually _do_ see these things, but they unconsciously regard
them as not important to their own safety, so they ignore them.

Wrong, and nonsensical.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inattentional_blindness
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attentional_Blink
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attentional_shift
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Change_blindness
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_perception
-----

- gpsman

gpsman writes:

Wrong, and nonsensical.

They see cars and obstacles, but not motorcycles and pedestrians. That's not
because of any fatigue in the retina or elsewhere in the vision system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inattentional_blindness
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attentional_Blink
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attentional_shift
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Change_blindness
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_perception

Ah yes, Wikipedia ... the final authority when it supports you, and amateur
nonsense when it doesn't.

On Apr 7, 9:50*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
gpsman writes:
Wrong, and nonsensical.

They see cars and obstacles, but not motorcycles and pedestrians.

Non sequitur.

That's not
because of any fatigue in the retina or elsewhere in the vision system.

Straw man.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inattentional_blindness
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attentional_Blink
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attentional_shift
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Change_blindness
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_perception

Ah yes, Wikipedia ... the final authority when it supports you, and amateur
nonsense when it doesn't.

Straw man. Your ignorance is willful.
-----

- gpsman

gpsman writes:

Non sequitur.

It is a rephrasing of my previous points.