Back

Looked but didn't see: inattentional blindness and yes-bias confabulation in vision-language models

Raymond, J. D.; Hu, P.; Solomon, B. D.; Duong, D.

2026-06-18 health informatics
10.64898/2026.06.16.26355792 medRxiv
Show abstract

Previous work showed that many participants fail to notice a gorilla in a video of people playing basketball. Another study found that 83% of trained radiologists failed to report a gorilla figure inserted into a chest CT nodule-search task, even though eye-tracking revealed that most observers had foveated the figure. We ask whether a similar phenomenon exists in contemporary vision-language models (VLMs). We find that (i) VLMs are capable of spotting the gorilla in both still-frame images and videos of lung CT scans; (ii) models display inattentional blindness, which varies according to model generation and type of stimulus presented; (iii) Gemini-3.1-Pro outperforms most other flagship and open-weight VLMs at identifying the presence or absence of the gorilla. We additionally ran a segmentation experiment utilizing two different model classes: a generalist (SAM 3), which found the gorilla but produced little to no results for anatomy-based prompts; a medical specialist (BiomedParse), which produced more promising anatomy-based results but flagged "gorilla" on gorilla-free control videos on 82% of frames. The behavioral signature of inattentional blindness reproduces in VLMs, but a unique confabulation failure mode means that any "did the model see X" claim requires signal-detection analysis with a matched-control false-alarm baseline.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
18.7%
2
PLOS Digital Health
106 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
12.0%
3
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 17%
10.7%
4
npj Digital Medicine
118 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
6.8%
5
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 6%
5.6%
50% of probability mass above
6
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
71 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.6%
7
Journal of Medical Internet Research
87 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.8%
8
iScience
1154 papers in training set
Top 11%
2.4%
9
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 43%
1.9%
10
Journal of Vision
110 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.9%
11
JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics
22 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.4%
12
JAMA Network Open
130 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
13
Nature Machine Intelligence
70 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
14
Translational Vision Science & Technology
39 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
15
Frontiers in Neuroscience
256 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
16
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.0%
17
Communications Psychology
22 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.0%
18
Patterns
78 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
19
Royal Society Open Science
214 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.0%
20
Cureus
68 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
21
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
60 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
22
Neural Networks
35 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
23
Cognitive Neurodynamics
18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
24
Human Brain Mapping
329 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
25
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
23 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
26
JAMIA Open
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
27
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
20 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
28
Biology Methods and Protocols
61 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%
29
Brain Informatics
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%