Despite inattentional blindness being a widely recognized and researched phenomenon — popularized by experiments like the invisible gorilla — the evidence on how individual differences affect the occurrence of inattentional blindness has remained inconsistent, largely due to small sample sizes and methodological variations.

 

In this context, Daniel J. Simons, known for his role in bringing public attention to inattentional blindness, along with Yifan Ding, Connor M. Hults, and Brent W. Roberts, presents an ambitious yet well-constructed registered report that addresses this critical gap in the literature. Their report outlines a comprehensive investigation into whether individual differences in cognitive ability or personality traits can predict the likelihood of noticing unexpected objects in various inattentional blindness tasks. The two proposed studies — one focusing on cognitive predictors and the other on personality predictors — arguably represent the most extensive single-sample tests to date on this topic.

 

The authors propose a robust methodology that includes a total of 2,000 participants (1,000 per study). The study design features three distinct inattentional blindness tasks with varying levels of demand to assess the generalizability of the findings across different experimental contexts. In Study 1, cognitive measures such as matrix reasoning and operation span — both well-established indicators of fluid intelligence and working memory — are utilized. Study 2 incorporates a range of personality measures, including the Big Five personality traits and attention-related traits (e.g., ADHD and obsessive-compulsive characteristics).

 

The report also presents a detailed analysis plan with pre-specified primary and secondary outcomes, strong justifications for the sample size, and clearly defined criteria for data inclusion and exclusion. The authors intend to employ multiple statistical techniques, such as correlation analyses and regression models, along with rigorous checks for replicability, to explore the relationship between individual differences and inattentional blindness.

 

Overall, this registered report is a well-justified and meticulously planned investigation into the role of individual differences in inattentional blindness. The proposed studies have the potential to make a significant contribution to our understanding of the cognitive and personality factors that influence the noticing of unexpected objects. The rigorous experimental design, large sample sizes, and adherence to open science practices make this a valuable addition to the literature.

Based on the strengths of the proposal and the authors' responsiveness to the detailed feedback from two reviewers, the recommender justed that the manuscript met the Stage 1 criteria and awarded in-principle acceptance (IPA).

URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/xtwfs (under temporary private embargo)
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. No part of the data or evidence that will be used to answer the research question yet exists and no part will be generated until after IPA.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly Journals:

 

• Advances in Cognitive Psychology
• Collabra: Psychology
• Cortex
• Experimental Psychology
• Journal of Cognition
• Peer Community Journal
• PeerJ
• Personality Science
• Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice
• Royal Society Open Science
• Studia Psychologica
• Swiss Psychology Open

 

 

Simons, D. J., Ding, Y., Hults, C. M., & Roberts, B. W. (2024). Registered Report: Do individual differences in cognitive ability or personality predict noticing in inattentional blindness tasks? In principle acceptance of Version 3 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/xtwfs