Cohn-Sheehy, BI, Pogue, BL, Shimamura, AP, Shimamura, TA 2015, ‘How Attention Is Driven by Film Edits: A Multimodal Experience’, Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 417-422.
One thought on “Cohn-Sheehy, BI, Pogue, BL, Shimamura, AP, Shimamura, TA 2015, ‘How Attention Is Driven by Film Edits: A Multimodal Experience’, Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 417-422.”
This particular experiment seeks explanation for why audience do not perceive film as numerous jarring edits. To do so their experiment focuses upon the idea of edit blindness, which suggests that changes or anomalies that occur across edits are not consciously detected. Before outlining their experimental process the authors also mention concepts such as backwards masking to explain why audiences do not register film edits. Audience perception of one stimulus is disrupted by the rapid presentation of a second stimulus; a particularly clear example of this is repeating action after a match action cut. In the article discussion is centred on two experiments that attempt to find when audience are less aware of a visual marker inserted into existing film sequences. These markers were inserted before or after a cut as well as in the middle of a shot. The second experiment repeated the same process but without sound. The findings of these experiments were that audience’s cognitive disruption occurs immediately after an edit and that this disruption was enhanced with sound. The second experiment suggested that people’s engagement with a film and thus disengagement with cuts was enhanced with sound.
This particular experiment seeks explanation for why audience do not perceive film as numerous jarring edits. To do so their experiment focuses upon the idea of edit blindness, which suggests that changes or anomalies that occur across edits are not consciously detected. Before outlining their experimental process the authors also mention concepts such as backwards masking to explain why audiences do not register film edits. Audience perception of one stimulus is disrupted by the rapid presentation of a second stimulus; a particularly clear example of this is repeating action after a match action cut. In the article discussion is centred on two experiments that attempt to find when audience are less aware of a visual marker inserted into existing film sequences. These markers were inserted before or after a cut as well as in the middle of a shot. The second experiment repeated the same process but without sound. The findings of these experiments were that audience’s cognitive disruption occurs immediately after an edit and that this disruption was enhanced with sound. The second experiment suggested that people’s engagement with a film and thus disengagement with cuts was enhanced with sound.