@article{TQMP22-2-56,
    author =    {Ouattara, M. M. AND Alexandre, E. AND Gagnon, M. AND Joanette, F. AND Lamarre, É. AND Mohamed Guirreh, S. AND Aboua Adon, O. AND Bellout, A. AND Billings, B. AND Bisson, G. AND Bouchard, V. AND Boucher, M. AND Boundzanga, R. AND Brousseau, P. AND Clark, L. AND Connors-Lee, E. AND Dabal, E. AND Daho, D. AND Gendron, A. AND Gowan, C. AND Grégoire, M. AND Hadley, L. AND Jean, W. AND Kaba, A. AND Mailhot, D. AND Mesidor, S. AND Minor, E. AND Montpetit, N. AND Prince, K. AND Ready, C. AND Sayah, Z. AND Tangba, Y. },
    journal =   {The Quantitative Methods for Psychology},
    publisher = {TQMP},
    title =     {A Replication of Rensink, O'Regan, and Clark (1997): Change Blindness in an Online Flicker Paradigm},
    year =      {2026},
    volume =    {22},
    number =    {2},
    url =       {http://www.tqmp.org/RegularArticles/vol22-2/p056/p056.pdf },
    pages =     {56-70},
    abstract =  {This study is a partial replication of Experiment 1 of Rensink, O’Regan, and Clark (1997), which introduced the flicker paradigm to investigate change blindness. Change blindness refers to the failure to detect large visual changes when a brief perceptual disruption eliminates the local motion signal that normally captures attention. Although widely cited as a foundational demonstration of attentional limits in visual perception, the original findings have not been subject to systematic independent replication. The present study addressed this gap using a larger sample (N = 69) and an online administration format via jsPsych. Participants were allocated to a flicker condition or a no-blank condition, with recruiters blind to condition assignment. Two hypotheses were tested: that the flicker manipulation would increase change detection reaction times, and that marginal interest changes would be detected more slowly than central interest changes, with this difference amplified under flicker conditions. Both hypotheses were supported. The flicker condition produced substantially longer detection times (Mann-Whitney U = 150.00, Z = -5.318, p < .001, Cohen’s d = 1.36). Marginal interest changes were harder to detect than central interest changes across all participants (Z = -6.62, p < .001), with the location effect substantially amplified under flicker conditions. Overall detection accuracy did not differ between conditions, ruling out a speed-accuracy tradeoff. These findings replicate the core results of Rensink et al. (1997), in a larger online sample, supporting the robustness of the flicker effect beyond controlled laboratory settings..},
    doi =       {10.20982/tqmp.22.2.p056}
}