Discussion?

54 Organization Development Journal

May I Have Your Attention Please? A Review of Change Blindness

Rebecca Ellis

Rebecca Ellis has over 12 years of experience in corporate learning and organization development in healthcare, financial services and construction sectors. She is currently an internal OE consultant at Edward Jones. Rebecca holds a Bachelor’s in

Mathematics Education from the University of Evansville and an M.S. Ed. in Instructional Systems Technology from Indiana University. She is currently a second year Ph.D. student in the Organization Development program at Benedictine University.

Contact Information Rebecca.Ellis@edwardjones.com

Abstract

The inability for individuals to recognize change occurring around them could be detrimental to change adoption and overall organizational effectiveness. There is a scientific challenge associated with the inability to recognize change and we are all susceptible. The phenomenon is called change blindness and, although it has not received focus in change management literature, it is frequently discussed in psychology journals. This paper aims to bring attention to the limits of human attention while providing guidance, which may decrease the possibility that individuals will be blind to the change occurring around them. Practitioners, leaders, and knowledge workers all stand to gain from awareness of the limits of attention. There is reason to suspect specific guidance on the use of visuals in change communication would benefit OD practitioners and consultants, particularly if the same benefits found in training and development can translate in OD. This review will draw on training and development research to highlight how visuals are used to maximize problem solving and lead to deeper understanding (Clark & Mayer, 2007; Clark, Nguyen & Sweller, 2006), which this researcher suggests might also be keys to successful change management.

Introduction

This paper explores relevant theories and research on the topics of change management, visual communication, and inattention. The literature review begins with a brief discussion of change management followed by a discussion on the cognitive value of visuals in communication. Finally, the review introduces the concept of inattention and change blindness, and highlights

55Volume 30 s Number 3 s Fall 2012

the impact of these phenomena on organization change efforts.

Change Management

Friedlander and Brown (1974) state, “since processes and structure are embedded in each other, it is almost impossible to create lasting change in one without modification of the other” (p. 315). This speaks to both the systemic and systematic aspects of any change effort. Although change starts with the individual, it must also be supported at the organizational level, and sometimes industry level, in order to be sustained. As such, change communication plans typically contain specific, focused key messages for the various target audiences. These key messages are then timed to be delivered when each message would have the most impact. The ideas in this paper are grounded in such an approach with an assumption that there is a desire to create effective communications for a variety of delivery methods and without regard to whether the change is planned or not, such as in reaction to changing environmental conditions.

Is There Really Such a Thing as Managed Change? Many have attempted to create a programmatic way to introduce and sustain change such as Lippitt’s set of heuristics for building models to facilitate organization change, which help structure change in a logical way (Alderfer, 1977). There are also alternative schools of thought stipulating that “change is not linear” and, as a result, is difficult to successfully express through a framework or model. As Beer and Walton (1987) highlight from the work of McLean et al.,

…planned change model is still used but often breaks down. The cycle (contracting, data collection, analysis, and feedback) results in

insufficient data for action and cycles back to data collection, an education program is set up as a precursor to change activities but detracts from objectives and becomes and end rather than a means, and a steering group may get bogged down analyzing its own process and neglect the problem it was formed to solve. (p. 359-360)

Cummings and Worley (2008) also make note that it is “seriously misleading” (p. 41) to describe planned change as a rationally controlled, orderly process. This is especially true in the wake of typical and common organization dynamics such as changing stakeholders, shifting goals, and other unexpected events. They further state, “Those emergent conditions make planned change a far more disorderly and dynamic process than is customarily portrayed, and conceptions need to capture that reality” (Cummings & Worley, 2008, p. 42).

Although change may not be a controlled or orderly process, there is likely an opportunity in every change effort to be thoughtful in planning the most effective communication to all who may be potentially impacted. Whether it is an intimate, individual discussion or a communication for the masses, this researcher believes there may be value in utilizing visual communications to impact understanding and adoption of the change.

Visual Communication

There may not be any hard evidence that a picture is indeed worth a thousand words; however this researcher found compelling evidence that a picture is highly valuable and useful in conveying thoughts and ideas. Richard Mayer’s research (Clark & Mayer, 2007) showed an 89% improvement in learning when a relevant visual was added to a previous text-only lesson. As an

56 Organization Development Journal

example, his research proved an 80 word, 5 illustration course was more effective than one with 6 times the amount of words and the same amount of illustrations (Clark & Mayer, 2007).

Paivio laid the foundation for the importance of visuals in communication when he developed his dual-coding theory over four decades ago (Mayer & Moreno, 1998). This seminal researched showed that humans process visual and verbal/auditory information separately. When appropriately leveraged, we can use both sides of working memory to maximize the learning potential. Multimedia instruction has been proven to garner improved transfer of knowledge as well as application. This researcher believes knowledge and transfer are key not only for effective learning outcomes but also for achieving maximum organization effectiveness. Recent research supports two main advantages of visual communication that should benefit Organization Development. These two advantages include deeper understanding of the content and increased problem solving capabilities.

Visuals Can Lead to Deeper Understanding Providing two methods for learning material – auditory and visual – provides two opportunities for schemas to be developed simultaneously. This increases cognitive load in a positive way that allows the learner the opportunity to integrate the two sources of information resulting in a higher level of understanding than if there had been one mode of communication (Clark, Nguyen, & Sweller, 2006). This useful, germane form of cognitive load deepens learning and increases understanding (Clark, Nguyen, & Sweller, 2006). By providing multimedia explanations, students build two mental models – visual and verbal – that are later connected leading to increased performance (Mayer & Moreno, 1998).

Visuals Can Aid Problem Solving The second benefit for organization effectiveness is related to problem-solving capabilities. Mayer (Clark & Mayer, 2007) has demonstrated a 50% increase in problem-solution generation in students who viewed an animation with simultaneous voice over than those who viewed the animation and heard the narration separately. Similarly, students who read a text explaining how tire pumps work that included captioned illustrations placed near the text generated about 75% more useful solutions on problem-solving transfer questions than did students who read the same text and illustrations presented on separate pages (Mayer & Moreno, 1998).

In Deborah Colwill’s (2010) article on the use of metaphors in consulting for change, she made a similar point related to problem solving in a discussion on innovation through visuals: “Generation of shared images, metaphors or knowledge leads to articulating innovative avenues of realizing a preferred future state” (p. 124). Considering the potential positive results for organization development that would come from increasing understanding and problem solving, this researcher believes a picture is indeed worth hundreds of words – if not thousands – when used properly; however it is not quite as simple as making sure the communication contains effective visual elements. There is a good reason Gagne’s (1988) first of nine instructional events is that of gaining attention. There is no basis for teaching content if you do not have the attention of the person you are trying to reach. The same is likely true for change communication. In fact it is probably even more critical in change and not solved by providing some provocative, attention getting opening. The audience may be blind to the fact that change is needed – or worse yet, that change has occurred and needs to be addressed.

57Volume 30 s Number 3 s Fall 2012

Inattention and Change Blindness

Even the smartest, most alert people are not immune to the interesting phenomenon called inattentional blindness (IB). Inattentional blindness is used to refer to family of instances where we commonly fail to see plainly visible items even though we are looking directly at them because they are not expected (Most, 2010). It occurs when our attention is devoted to another task or object. Magicians exploit our limited attention capacity by manipulating where we focus our attention. That type of induced IB is called attentional misdirection (Chabris & Simons, 2010). Another type of IB is change blindness. Change blindness is the “surprising failure to notice the seemingly obvious changes from one moment to the next” (Chabris & Simons, 2010, p. 54). It is this type of IB that this researcher argues is most concerning for the change consultant and OD practitioner.

Chabris and Simons have gained attention on inattention at a large scale since their mid-1990s release of the now infamous gorilla video where an

individual in a gorilla costume enters the center of a basketball game, bangs her hands on her chest and exits out the other side of the screen. In nearly every experimental situation, less than 50% of the audience detects the gorilla (Chabris & Simons, 2010). Why? Mainly because the video narrator assigned a task of counting only the white team’s basketball passes so the dark team – and anything else dark – does not get attention. In essence, the gorilla blends into the background. Cognitive load also likely plays a role. Vickery, Jiang, and Sussman (2010) have proved memory is impaired when attention is diverted by second task, such as counting basketball passes, which lowers our conscious perception thereby lessening our memory of a salient object, such as the gorilla. Karns and Rivardo (2010) explained “IB may not be of significant concern even in serious situations if perceptual load is low enough, and it may be nearly unavoidable if load is too high” (p. 646). As Chabris and Simons (2010) simply put it, “Looking is not sufficient for seeing” (p. 16).

Figure 1.

58 Organization Development Journal

What Causes Inattentional Blindness? Inattentional blindness is unavoidable; however there are a few strategies to mitigate the impact. It is first helpful to understand why it occurs. The literature points to five main reasons why we are susceptible to change blindness (Figure 1).

Goals and Expectations. Attention is directed to goal-relevant locations (Vogt, De Houwer & Crombez, 2011). We cannot eliminate IB because we cannot eliminate goals and expectations. They are human nature and help us make sense of what we see. Have you ever wondered why you can look at a set of clouds and easily spot a dog, sailboat or other common object? It is because our brain has easy access to those items. Those objects match our experience and expectations. Our mind fits unknown shapes into known shapes at every opportunity. Moment-to-moment expectations determine what we see – or miss – more so than the distinctiveness of the object within view (Chabris & Simons, 2010). There is often more than one competing goal or expectation. As Vogt et al. (2011) point out, “in most real-life situations…individuals are pursuing more than one goal at a time” (p. 55). When multiple goals are present, the one with the highest perceived value and highest expectancy of success receive the most attention (Vogt et al., 2011).

Working Memory Limitations. When we are more taxed, using more virtual working memory or involved in multiple tasks, IB goes up and is likely unavoidable (Karns & Rivardo, 2010). The probability of IB decreases when cognitive load decreases. The two are directly related. According to Olsson and Poom (2005), “Visual working memory has a maximum capacity of only one object” (p. 8776). The one object maximum relates to objects in the same category. Additional studies determined four different items could be stored if

each belonged to a different and distinct category (Olsson & Poom, 2005).

Complexity/Speed. As Chabris and Simons (2010) explain, our brains are "built for pedestrian speeds, not for driving speeds." The complexity of today’s world is definitely a challenge and the speed at which we are expected to process new information is pushing us beyond our innate capabilities. IB increases with complexity and speed. This is an important consideration as many organization changes are quite complex.

Limited Attention Capacities. As the gorilla experiment points out, our attention is not unlimited. It is not possible to be conscious of all of the actions or events occurring in our visual field. Devoting more attention in one place means reducing it in another.

Visual Misdirection/Distractions. When our attention is focused or directed in one area, we miss things happening in other areas of our visual field. As previously mentioned, magicians exploit IB. Misdirection can induce a failure to notice even expected stimuli whereas change blindness prevents us from noticing unexpected objects and events (Most, 2010).

The concept of “attention” has been of paramount importance for educators for decades (Gagne, 1988). Although this researcher has not found a specific tie of attention to change management in the IB literature, there are four examples of IB that help build the case for awareness of the impact on organization effectiveness.

Humans are unaware of limits of attention (e.g. using cell phones). As an example of this overconfidence, 70% of study participants believed they would spot significant changes but not one

59Volume 30 s Number 3 s Fall 2012

person caught any of the 9 intentional editing errors made in the movie they were shown (Chabris & Simons, 2010). This reinforces the notion that only a small percentage of stimuli reach conscious awareness. What is the potential harm related to unawareness on limits of attention for those frequently multitasking on the job? What are the implications for ideal job design and for individuals who are required to divide attention on too many tasks in the workplace?

Memories of events can be changed by viewing doctored photos. “Emotional memories seem more accurate but are not” (Chabris & Simons, 2010, p. 65). For example when considering research of eyewitness testimony, visual memory is more accurate than a combination of the individual’s own written description of the event plus his/her visual memory (Weinberg & Hajcack, 2010). In other words, reflection does not help with recalling accurate details. How could organization consultants and practitioners use this as an advantage by perhaps using visuals of the future/desired state to influence the emotions and/or beliefs related to the move from the current to future state?

Looked-but-failed-to-see driving errors account for the third highest cause of accidents and make up 10% of the total (White & Caird, 2010). Although individuals look in the direction of a changing object, they miss it. In our everyday lives, this is a real threat as we fail to notice the approaching motorcycle due to expectations of encountering a car (Chabris & Simons, 2010). Motorcycle driving schools spend a good portion of their curriculum teaching motorcycle drivers how to be “seen”. How might this relate to or have implications for workplace safety?

Most aspects of cognition decline with age in

particular the executive functions of memory, attention, processing speed and multitasking. In a recent study, the 18-25 age group detected change 74.2% of the time while the 75+ age group only detected change 54% of the time (White & Caird, 2010). Graham and Burke (2011) point out that “on a practical level, the results suggest that older adults’ safety in everyday life may be jeopardized when safety depends on noticing fully visible unexpected objects while performing an attention- demanding task” (p. 4). As the workforce ages, how might we reduce the impact of this decline in functioning?

Mitigating Inattentional Blindness Unfortunately, people cannot be trained to improve attention overall. Although individuals can learn to recognize a specific object/event thereby making it more expected; there is no overall improvement in change blindness so it does not help with the detection of the next new unexpected object (Chabris & Simons, 2010). Despite the fact that there is not a fix, there are six main strategies for mitigating the effect of inattentional blindness based on recent literature. Eliminate IB by designing unexpected objects/events to look more like expected objects/events. For example, Chabris and Simons (2010) suggest it would make more sense to design motorcycles to look more like a cars by adding a two headlight design since that is a distinguishing feature of cars – the more expected object. Some manufactures, like Triumph, have now incorporated twin headlights into their design and many conversion kits are on the market to retrofit older motorcycles.

Tell an Intriguing Story. Humans tend to remember a narrative better when inferences are made due to the richer, more elaborate memories being formed. Chabris and Simons (2010) explain that the mind prefers leaps of logic over being told

60 Organization Development Journal

facts explicitly. In addition, personal anecdotes were more memorable and remembered longer than abstract data (Chabris & Simons, 2010). What do you remember most about the last dramatic sports match you watched – the story around the winning play or the final score?

Reduce Chaos. Eliminate the need to divide attention or multitask as much as possible. Memory is impaired when attention is diverted by a second task (Vickery, Sussman & Jiang, 2010). Keep in mind, based on what was learned regarding different categories of objects; it is easier to give divided attention to similar objects than distinctly different objects. For this reason, as in training, chunking like items together may be valuable in situations where it is necessary to provide extensive content. Increase content expertise. Experience matters. When individuals are trained to the point that tasks are automatic, working memory is freed and IB is reduced. This was demonstrated in two experiments. First, in a basketball experiment, those with playing experience did better. Secondly, experienced drivers tended to more safety related changes when compared to inexperienced drives as measured by average distance driven per year (Memmert & Furley, 2010). Looking at this another way, similar to education and training, organization development practitioners can facilitate quicker mastery of new content by tapping into individuals’ experience and relating all new content to prior knowledge (Vickery, Sussman & Jiang, 2010).

Encourage Aerobic Activity. Recent research suggests that walking 30 minutes a few times a week beat puzzles and mind exercises when it comes to maintaining a healthy brain (Hillman, Erickson & Kramer, 2008). The cardiovascular activity increased executive functioning (i.e.

planning & multitasking) which can help facilitate reduced cognitive load and lower the probability of IB.

Build IB Awareness. When we understand the attentional limits imposed by our brain, we tend to take steps to avoid missing what we need to see (Chabris & Simons, 2010). One personal example is the knowledge this researcher acquired regarding the cognitive drain related to a cell phone conversation while driving as opposed to having the same conversation with a fellow passenger in the same vehicle. There is proof the two are very different and it is not a matter of physical limitations (i.e. holding a phone). This knowledge has changed how this researcher uses these devices while commuting daily. It also sheds light on the potential ineffectiveness of laws mandating the use of “hands free” devices since those laws are not targeting the core of the issue.

There is one final factor that may be worth investigating - emotion. Emotional stimuli are viewed longer and more likely to be recalled, regardless of degree, than non-emotional stimuli (Weinberg & Hajcack, 2010). In other words, items that are more negative in nature tend to capture and hold attention better than positive emotion items. According to Weinberg and Hajcack (2010), the negative item received increased allocation. That leads this researcher to suspect, since change is often viewed as negative, a change effort will inherently get increased attention. If this is indeed the case, how can we maximize the return of this increased allocation of attention for the benefit of increasing adopting and sustaining change?

Conclusion

If we begin to treat change adoption in the same vein as learning a new knowledge, skill, behavior or attitude, there are likely opportunities to learn

61Volume 30 s Number 3 s Fall 2012

best practices from the education and communication arenas. From 1995-2003, at least 17 studies were conducted on the use of multimedia and visuals in training (Clark, Nguyen & Sweller, 2006). These studies have repeatedly proven the value of visuals in instructor led training and web- based instruction for increasing performance.

Despite the wealth of data and advice available to training and development practitioners, this researcher has not located any related research in the context of change. If there are potential options for improving performance, we should explore them. Given the potential benefits and possible negative implications for organization development, we need to learn more about change blindness and effective use of visual communications so that we can improve our changes for successful change implementation. With the known challenges related to change adoption, any increase in probability would be helpful to the organization development community.

This paper highlights opportunities to increase recognition/acknowledgment of change which seems like a necessary first step for a given individual to accept/adopt the change. Research on what mitigation strategies are most effective would benefit the organization development community immensely. There are also opportunities related to job design, workplace safety, generational studies and wellness that would also lead to increased organization effectiveness.

Another opportunity for research is the topic of effective use of visuals in change communications. As mentioned earlier, nearly all change events have a communication plan that dictates what messages are being sent at specific times to specific audiences. Although this mass, one-way

communication may not go as far as more personal two-way communication regarding the change, there is often a need to get the same message out to a broad population at the beginning of a change implementation so it should be as effective as possible. Even though a variety of media is often used, the messages are not always designed in a way that makes them most user friendly. Research on the impact of reducing cognitive load in change communications might prove valuable to organization development practitioners who are helping craft these important messages.

Through future research, we may soon discover that instructional communication research, which demonstrated appropriate use of visuals increased an individual’s capacity to take in more information, will also be useful in communicating change by maximizing working memory and deepening understanding. A deeper understanding combined with better problem solving might not only lead to higher probabilities of successful adoption of change but also to better, more sustainable solutions for the problems that need attention.

References

Alderfer, C. P. (1977). Organization development. Annual Review of Psychology, 28, 197.

Beer, M., & Walton, A. E. (1987). Organizational change and development. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 339-367. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.38.020187.002011

Chabris, C.F., & Simons, D.J. (2010). The invisible gorilla: and other ways our intuitions deceive us. New York, NY: Crown Publishers.

Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2007). e-Learning and the science of instruction (2nd ed). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

62 Organization Development Journal

Clark, R.C., Nguyen, F. & Sweller, J. (2006). Efficiency in learning: evidence–based guidelines to manage cognitive load. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Colwill, D. (2010). The use of metaphor in consulting for organizational change. In A. Buono & D. Jamieson (Eds.), Consultation for Organizational Change (pp. 113-135). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.

Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2008). Organization development and change (9th ed.). Minneapolis: West Publishing Company.

Friedlander, F., & Brown, L. D. (1974). Organization development. Annual Review of Psychology, 25, 313-340.

Gagne, R. M. (1988). Mastery learning and instructional design. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 1: 7–18. doi: 10.1111/j.1937-8327.1988.tb00003.x

Graham, E. R., & Burke, D. M. (2011). Aging increases inattentional blindness to the gorilla in our midst. Psychology and Aging, doi:10.1037/a0020647

Hillman, C. H., Erickson, K. I, & Kramer, A. F. (2008). Be smart, exercise your heart: exercise effects on brain and cognition. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9(1), 58-65.

Karns, T. E., & Rivardo, M. G. (2010). Noticing of an unexpected event is affected by attentional set for expected action. North American Journal of Psychology, 12(3), 637-649.

Mayer, R. E. & Moreno, R. (1998, April). A cognitive theory of multimedia learning: Implications for design principles. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Los Angeles, CA.

Memmert, D., & Furley, P. (2010). Beyond inattentional blindness and attentional misdirection: From attentional paradigms to attentional mechanisms doi:10.1016/j.concog.2010.06.005

Most, S. B. (2010). What’s “inattentional” about inattentional blindness? Consciousness and Cognition: An International Journal, 19(4), 1102-1104. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2010.01.011

Olsson, H., & Poom, L. (2005). Visual memory needs categories. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(24), 8776-8780.

Vickery, T. J., Sussman, R. S., & Jiang, Y. V. (2010). Spatial context learning survives interference from working memory load. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36(6), 1358-1371. doi:10.1037/a0020558

Vogt, J., De Houwer, J., & Crombez, G. (2011). Multiple goal management starts with attention: Goal prioritizing affects the allocation of spatial attention to goal- relevant events. Experimental Psychology, 58(1), 55-61. doi:10.1027/1618-3169/a000066

Weinberg, A., & Hajcak, G. (2010). Beyond good and evil: The time-course of neural activity elicited by specific picture content. Emotion, 10(6), 767-782. doi:10.1037/a0020242

White, C. B., & Caird, J. K. (2010). The blind date: The effects of change blindness, passenger conversation and gender on looked-but- failed-to-see (LBFTS) errors. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 42(6), 1822-1830. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2010.05.003

Copyright of Organization Development Journal is the property of Organization Development Institute and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.