# Christmas Present article... **URL:** \ **Category:** CSG2016\ **Created:** [December 22, 2016, 1:47pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/christmas-present-article/2540 "2016-12-22T13:47:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![wmansell](http://discourse.iapct.org/user_avatar/discourse.iapct.org/wmansell/32/36_2.png) [@wmansell](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/wmansell)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2016, 1:47pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/christmas-present-article/2540/1 "2016-12-22T13:47:49Z")
Hi CSGers, Here is a teaser for an Open Access paper published with Attention, Perception & Psychophysics in the New Year… Control Blindness Why People Can Make Incorrect Inferences about the Intentions of Others Andrew B. S. Willett Program for Cognitive Science, Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, New York 12604, USA Richard S. Marken Department of Psychology, Antioch University, Los Angeles, USA Maximilian G. Parker & Warren Mansell School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. Abstract There is limited evidence regarding the accuracy of inferences about intention. The research described in this paper shows how Perceptual Control Theory (PCT) canprovide a “ground truth” for these judgements. In a series of three studies, participants were asked to identify a person’s intention in a tracking task where the person’s true intentionwas to control the position of a knot connecting a pair of rubber bands. Most participants failed to correctly infer the person’s intention, instead inferring complex but non-existent goals (such as “tracing out two kangaroos boxingâ€?) based on the actions taken to keep the knot under control. Therefore, most of our participants experienced what we call “control blindness.â€? The effect persisted with many participants even when their awareness was successfully directed at the knot whose position was under control. Beyond exploring the control blindness phenomenon in the context of our studies, we discuss its implications for psychological research and public policy. ​Keywords: control theory, theory of mind, intentional state, inference > **···** > ---
**Author:** ![FredNickols](http://discourse.iapct.org/user_avatar/discourse.iapct.org/frednickols/32/2645_2.png) [@FredNickols](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/FredNickols)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2016, 2:05pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/christmas-present-article/2540/2 "2016-12-22T14:05:55Z")
[From Fred Nickols (2016.12.22.0905 ET)] Sounds great, Warren. When and where will I be able to read it? Fred Nickols > **···** > > **From:** Warren Mansell [[mailto:wmansell@gmail.com](mailto:wmansell@gmail.com)] > **Sent:** Thursday, December 22, 2016 8:48 AM > **To:** [csgnet@lists.illinois.edu](mailto:csgnet@lists.illinois.edu) [csgnet@lists.illinois.edu](mailto:csgnet@lists.illinois.edu); Control Systems Group Network [CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU](mailto:CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU) > **Subject:** Christmas Present article… > > Hi CSGers, > > Here is a teaser for an Open Access paper published with Attention, Perception & Psychophysics in the New Year… > > Control Blindness > > Why People Can Make Incorrect Inferences about the Intentions of Others > > Andrew B. S. Willett > > Program for Cognitive Science, Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, New York 12604, USA > > Richard S. Marken > > **Department of Psychology, Antioch University, Los Angeles, USA** > > Maximilian G. Parker & Warren Mansell > > School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. > > Abstract > > There is limited evidence regarding the accuracy of inferences about intention. The research described in this paper shows how Perceptual Control Theory (PCT) canprovide a “ground truth” for these judgements. In a series of three studies, participants were asked to identify a person’s intention in a tracking task where the person’s true intentionwas to control the position of a knot connecting a pair of rubber bands. Most participants failed to correctly infer the person’s intention, instead inferring complex but non-existent goals (such as “tracing out two kangaroos boxingâ€?) based on the actions taken to keep the knot under control. Therefore, most of our participants experienced what we call “control blindness.â€? The effect persisted with many participants even when their awareness was successfully directed at the knot whose position was under control. Beyond exploring the control blindness phenomenon in the context of our studies, we discuss its implications for psychological research and public policy. > > ​_Keywords:_ control theory, theory of mind, intentional state, inference ---
**Author:** ![bnhpct](http://discourse.iapct.org/user_avatar/discourse.iapct.org/bnhpct/32/34_2.png) [@bnhpct](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/bnhpct)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2016, 10:28pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/christmas-present-article/2540/3 "2016-12-25T22:28:47Z")
Now that is really clever! Instead of arguing that the reader should learn about and pay attention to the phenomenon of control, as new information, turn it around and implicitly the phenomenon of control is established, old information, and the focus is on the interesting psychological phenomenon of blindness to it. The reader certainly does not want to be like those subjects of the experiment who are described in the article. No, no, as psychological experts they want to have the benefit of having read the back of the book so they can see through the illusion and demonstrate to others how clever they are. Congratulations to the four authors! > **···** > > On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Warren Mansell [wmansell@gmail.com](mailto:wmansell@gmail.com) wrote: > > > Hi CSGers, > > > Here is a teaser for an Open Access paper published with Attention, Perception & Psychophysics in the New Year… > > > > > >  > > > Control Blindness > > > Why People Can Make Incorrect Inferences about the Intentions of Others > > > > > > Andrew B. S. Willett > > > Program for Cognitive Science, Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, New York 12604, USA > > >  > > > Richard S. Marken > > > Department of Psychology, Antioch University, Los Angeles, USA > > >  > > > Maximilian G. Parker & Warren Mansell > > > School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. > > >  > > > Abstract > > > There is limited evidence regarding the accuracy of inferences about intention. The research described in this paper shows how Perceptual Control Theory (PCT) canprovide a “ground truth” for these judgements. In a series of three studies, participants were asked to identify a person’s intention in a tracking task where the person’s true intentionwas to control the position of a knot connecting a pair of rubber bands. Most participants failed to correctly infer the person’s intention, instead inferring complex but non-existent goals (such as “tracing out two kangaroos boxingâ€?) based on the actions taken to keep the knot under control. Therefore, most of our participants experienced what we call “control blindness.â€? The effect persisted with many participants even when their awareness was successfully directed at the knot whose position was under control. Beyond exploring the control blindness phenomenon in the context of our studies, we discuss its implications for psychological research and public policy.  > > > ​Keywords: control theory, theory of mind, intentional state, inference > > >  > > >  > > >  > > >  > > > > > >