Social cues for experimenter incompetence influence choice blindness

IF 2.1 3区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL

Consciousness and Cognition Pub Date : 2025-05-16 DOI:10.1016/j.concog.2025.103887

Nicolás Marchant , Gorka Navarrete , Vincent de Gardelle , Jaime R. Silva , Jérôme Sackur , Gabriel Reyes

{"title":"Social cues for experimenter incompetence influence choice blindness","authors":"Nicolás Marchant , Gorka Navarrete , Vincent de Gardelle , Jaime R. Silva , Jérôme Sackur , Gabriel Reyes","doi":"10.1016/j.concog.2025.103887","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Choice blindness refers to a surprising blind spot we have about choices made only seconds ago. After making a choice between two items, observers presented with the unchosen item may fail to report the incongruence, and even provide justifications for a choice they did not make. Here, we show that this effect is modulated by participant’s perception of the reliability of the environment. In three experiments, we introduced cues about the competence or incompetence of experimenters, either during or before the traditional choice blindness phase. When manifest reliability of the experimenter decreased, participants were more likely to report the mismatch between the chosen item and the item presented to them. Our results reinforce the notion that choice blindness is a context-dependent phenomenon, permeable to social cues in the context of psychological experiments. Dataset and the analysis scripts are available at the Open Science Foundation at: <span><span>https://osf.io/ht769/</span><svg><path></path></svg></span>.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51358,"journal":{"name":"Consciousness and Cognition","volume":"132 ","pages":"Article 103887"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Consciousness and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053810025000807","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Choice blindness refers to a surprising blind spot we have about choices made only seconds ago. After making a choice between two items, observers presented with the unchosen item may fail to report the incongruence, and even provide justifications for a choice they did not make. Here, we show that this effect is modulated by participant’s perception of the reliability of the environment. In three experiments, we introduced cues about the competence or incompetence of experimenters, either during or before the traditional choice blindness phase. When manifest reliability of the experimenter decreased, participants were more likely to report the mismatch between the chosen item and the item presented to them. Our results reinforce the notion that choice blindness is a context-dependent phenomenon, permeable to social cues in the context of psychological experiments. Dataset and the analysis scripts are available at the Open Science Foundation at: https://osf.io/ht769/.

查看原文本刊更多论文

实验者无能的社会线索影响选择盲视

选择盲指的是我们对几秒钟前做出的选择产生的一个令人惊讶的盲点。在两个项目之间做出选择后，观察者看到未选择的项目可能不会报告不一致，甚至会为他们没有做出的选择提供理由。在这里，我们表明这种影响是由参与者对环境可靠性的感知调节的。在三个实验中，我们在传统的选择盲视阶段或之前引入了关于实验者能力或无能的线索。当实验者的显示信度降低时，参与者更有可能报告所选项目与所呈现项目之间的不匹配。我们的研究结果强化了选择盲视是一种情境依赖现象的概念，在心理学实验的背景下，它可以渗透到社会线索中。数据集和分析脚本可在开放科学基金会获得：https://osf.io/ht769/。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Consciousness and Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-

CiteScore

4.30

自引率

8.30%

发文量

123

期刊介绍： Consciousness and Cognition: An International Journal provides a forum for a natural-science approach to the issues of consciousness, voluntary control, and self. The journal features empirical research (in the form of regular articles and short reports) and theoretical articles. Integrative theoretical and critical literature reviews, and tutorial reviews are also published. The journal aims to be both scientifically rigorous and open to novel contributions.