

Subtle Distractors May Divert Action More Than Overt Ones - dpflan
https://news.brown.edu/articles/2015/07/salience

======
mangeletti
I started to think, "But, isn't it an oxymoron to suggest that something is
more overt, if it distracts less..." when I realized, the true discovery in
these tests is just that we can't really judge what is overt, because that's
based on context.

Here is an example:

    
    
        You're driving down the freeway at 90mph. As you begin
        rounding a corner there is a giant red sign on the left
        that says, "You need a heart transplant!" in huge,
        reflective white writing, while on the right a deer's
        eyes glow in your headlights just as he begins to jump
        in front of you.
    

Which is more "salient"? The deer is a mere pair of one inch eyes glowing in
your headlights, while the billboard is seventy five feet of glowing red and
white. Salience is based on context and perceived importance of a pattern, and
that function cannot simply be overridden.

Here's another (different kind of) example:

    
    
        You're driving down the freeway at 90mph, using Waze to
        track police locations and avoid tickets, when all of
        the sudden you see a lightning bolt a few yards in
        front of you...
    

Now you're thinking about Waze (esp if you've used it), even though I
mentioned there was a lightning bolt in your face.

~~~
dpflan
The experiment used symbols with values attributed to them, so the diamond was
the most valuable, followed by the red circle, followed by the green circle.
This reward context meant that they were seeking these symbols, assessing
their value and influence with regard to the goal: getting the diamond. In
your example with the sign and deer, the goal is driving safely - the deer is
a negative presence, something to avoid, the sign is a negative presence,
something to avoid, which you are comparing using visible area. You've been
trained in different ways regarding deer and billboards, and they behave
differently - billboards don't move, deer can. The deer seems more salient,
unless I really do need a heart transplant because perhaps the context of my
future health - greater than duration of my car trip - is more valuable to me
than my health during the car trip?

~~~
mangeletti
My point is that the "values" attributed to them are not necessarily intrinsic
in the eyes of the subjects of the experiment, regardless of whether they've
been designed to be so (based on rewards, etc.).

