Quote:
|
I've noticed that the vast majority of people (in my experience) when walking into a room or through an area (ie. in school or work) are almost tunnel visioned on what lies directly ahead of them... like just getting from point A to point B... so if they were walking down a road they would just be looking straight down the road, not paying attention to the background or ever looking side to side. I've noticed in my experience that only a few people will look at the people around them. I would like to know what everyone's hypothesis is on: why so many people don't (or why more people don't) pay more attention to their surroundings... like when they enter a room... look at all the objects or people in it (more than a super quick automatic glance or peripheral vision), when studying in a study area, why don't they look at the people around them more frequently? When someone or something new (that's not being obnoxious) enters their area/room.. why not look at it? Why not pay more attention to the changing scenery (outside of nature trips lol) when in populated environments?
|
I tried imagine doing all those things you're asking why we don't do, and it seems really mentally taxing and impractically time-consuming. And in the case of looking at other people, potentially confusing and slightly rude. You excluded peripheral vision and quick glances, so it seems you mean pausing to look directly at something for longer than a glance. What would be the advantage of acting like that?
I think people in these situations are using a lot of mental shortcuts that are not specific to humans. If I've seen something in the past, and it continues to look the same next time I see it in my peripheral vision, and I'm not expecting it to change, I'm going to figure hasn't changed.
For stuff like driving, looking around frequently is very important to the task of driving. (Peripheral vision and brief glances are still used a lot, out of necessity.) The situation, with other cars and such, is constantly changing in a way that's relevant to the task. Likewise for stuff like nature hikes, ogling the scenery is a good part of the appeal. On the other hand, if you're in the library reading a book, looking around frequently is not helpful. Even if they notice a new stimulus, if it's not something they're interested in, they won't turn to look at it.
Having awareness of something and having your eyes pointed at something aren't the same thing. To use an extreme example, imagine you had to continually look at the ground near your feet in order to walk! You probably don't need to do that because the awareness you already have of the ground is adequate for the task of walking. I don't think animals would be able to function in the wild if they didn't have this ability. It would be hard to find food, predators would catch them easily, etc. So I'm guessing this is the result of natural selection.
I've noticed that I can have my eyes point at something and
not be aware of it.
It's worse when I'm not taking meds for ADHD, but even when treated, it can occasionally be problematic. I've had to forbid anyone in my car from talking while I'm driving, because their speech seems to use up too much of my brain power (even if I'm not trying to listen to them!) so even if I'm looking around as normal, I'll do stuff like run red lights.
To put it another way... you said you scan rooms/people/objects and then pay more attention to things that catch your attention or curiosity... but what about all the other things that don't catch your attention or curiosity? When you see other people not looking at various stimuli around them, I think those stimuli are things that haven't caught the attention/curiosity of those people. They still notice the other stimuli (usually), but they are more interested in the activity they're already doing.