Metacognitive errors in change detection: Lab and life converge

Smilek, Eastwood, Reynolds, and Kingstone (2007) suggests that the studies reported in Beck, M. R., Levin, D. T. and Angelone, B. A. (2007) (Change blindness blindness: Beliefs about the roles of intention and scene complexity in change detection. Consciousness and Cognition) are not ecologically valid. Here, we argue that not only are change blindness and change blindness blindness studies in general ecologically valid, but that the studies we reported in Beck, Levin, and Angelone, 2007 are as well. Specifically, we suggest that many of the changes used in our study could reasonably be expected to occur in the real world. Furthermore, the conclusion from Beck et al. (2007) that knowledge about the role of intention and scene complexity in change detection is not readily accessible applies not only to the laboratory studies we conducted but also to real world situations.