Choice Blindness in a Military Setting

ObjectiveWe examined the impact of choice blindness in applied military contexts.BackgroundChoice Blindness occurs in intention-directed decision making when an individual fails to detect when a previously chosen option is covertly changed and confabulates, providing a false justification for why they selected the non-chosen option. Approximately 67-75% of people show Choice Blindness when tested.MethodWe investigated Choice Blindness in simulated military tasks using two experiments. Novices (Experiment 1) and experts (Experiment 2) went through an all-source intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) scenario with a primary goal of determining why missiles were moved. Participants chose which intelligence (information) source was most critical between pairs on each trial, then were presented with their chosen intelligence and asked to explain their choice. The selected intelligence was covertly switched on trials 3, 6, and 9 of a 9-trial sequence.Results76% of participants failed to detect the switch in Experiment 1. After accounting for individuals who ignored the switch, the remaining participants who exhibited Choice Blindness constituted about 20-25% of the sample. In both experiments, approximately 50% of participants failed to detect any of the switched intelligence sources without confabulating, including the ISR Subject Matter Experts who participated in Experiment 2.ConclusionBoth experts and novices showed a similar propensity to choice blindness in an applied military task.ApplicationIn a military context, an operator succumbing to choice blindness could be potentially dangerous, leading to improper communication, or reduced decision-making efficacy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
Published
2026-04-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208261444690
Primary Topic
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Choice Blindness in a Military Setting

J. Christopher Brill, Anna M. Maresca, Regina Buccello-Stout, Mary E. Frame et al.
Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
article

Choice Blindness in a Military Setting

J. Christopher Brill, Anna M. Maresca, Regina Buccello-Stout, Mary E. Frame, Robert Patterson, Barbara Acker-Mills, Kyle Hart, Erica Christoffers
article en

Abstract

ObjectiveWe examined the impact of choice blindness in applied military contexts.BackgroundChoice Blindness occurs in intention-directed decision making when an individual fails to detect when a previously chosen option is covertly changed and confabulates, providing a false justification for why they selected the non-chosen option. Approximately 67-75% of people show Choice Blindness when tested.MethodWe investigated Choice Blindness in simulated military tasks using two experiments. Novices (Experiment 1) and experts (Experiment 2) went through an all-source intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) scenario with a primary goal of determining why missiles were moved. Participants chose which intelligence (information) source was most critical between pairs on each trial, then were presented with their chosen intelligence and asked to explain their choice. The selected intelligence was covertly switched on trials 3, 6, and 9 of a 9-trial sequence.Results76% of participants failed to detect the switch in Experiment 1. After accounting for individuals who ignored the switch, the remaining participants who exhibited Choice Blindness constituted about 20-25% of the sample. In both experiments, approximately 50% of participants failed to detect any of the switched intelligence sources without confabulating, including the ISR Subject Matter Experts who participated in Experiment 2.ConclusionBoth experts and novices showed a similar propensity to choice blindness in an applied military task.ApplicationIn a military context, an operator succumbing to choice blindness could be potentially dangerous, leading to improper communication, or reduced decision-making efficacy.

Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
United States Air Force Research Laboratory (US), Parallax Research (United States) (US), The Mofet Institute (IL)
711th Human Performance Wing
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.