Talk:Change blindness

Neuroscience C‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is currently the subject of an educational assignment.

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Klausfaust, Isaac Mervis (article contribs).

Anonymous note?

[The following text was incorrectly stuck between header templates on this page, so I moved it under its own header here —Adallace (talk)]
Aha, I looked at the history and found why Aginsky et al is cited - it does talk about perceiving changes while being concentrated on something different, and that was for what it was cited in the first place. But as the sentence is now, the citation should be dropped.

Unclear sentence

In the practical implications section: "In many cases, witnesses are rarely able to detect a change in the criminal's identity unless first intending to remember the incident in question"

I don't understand what 'a change in the criminal's identity' would mean. Not noticing that two different people (rather than the same person) did different actions? It's not at all clear. Vultur (talk) 02:32, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clarity problems

Most of the information in this article is relevant, but hard to tell how, or why it is placed in certain areas. Under “neuroanantomy”, the role of attention presents itself and then attention appears in influencing factors and it is distracting to see what belongs where. Secondly, there are areas in the article that don’t have citations, and then there are areas that draw from one or more references over and over again such as the beginning of the article when it uses the references two and three, and it is difficult to see if these are facts or just one reference’s opinion. A.McAuliffe (talk) 00:24, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]