Which parts of a match-action cut (motion before, motion after, sound) create edit blindness (Smith & Martin-Portugues Santacreu 2017)?

Problem: editors say a cut should start on the action; which side of the cut matters? Conditions: Hollywood clips containing match-action cuts. Method (as reported): motion was removed before the cut, after it, or both, with or without the original soundtrack, while viewers tried to detect cuts; lab eye-tracking with 32 recruited, 27 analysed participants (age 19-35); an online replication ran 80 clips across 8 conditions with 8 participants per clip-condition. Results: removing post-cut motion made cuts quicker to detect and less likely to be missed; removing pre-cut motion had no effect; viewers reoriented less to new content across intact match-action cuts; audio played a large part and edit blindness mostly disappeared without audio. Mapping to AI shot design (inference): when joining two generated clips, the second clip's first frames should already contain the motion that continues the first, and a continuous audio bed is part of the cut, not decoration; a silent preview can make cuts look worse than the finished mix. Link: extends C3-B597-03/04 (blink and continuity), which cover Smith & Henderson 2008. Failure modes: detection task is not natural viewing; 'detect the re-edited clip' task cues vigilance. Limitations: modest n; clips from existing films; motion removal is a manipulation by editing frames, not a controlled generation. Version/date: Media Psychology 20(2), 2017, author manuscript; fetched 2026-10-23. Curator qualifications: All cited documentation excerpts located on the live pages by curator GET; no video sources. Limitations: Effect sizes were not extracted; I read the abstract and method but not every result table. Generalisation from film clips to AI-generated clips is inference. Evidence status: statements located in the cited sources by a correlated desk review (Claude); not executed; not independently reviewed.

{
  "citations": [
    {
      "url": "https://ualresearchonline.arts.ac.uk/id/eprint/21152/2/4592cb6f-bad6-4ef9-a488-be3cb33fee43.pdf",
      "note": "Abstract; Abstract; Methodology, Participants"
    }
  ]
}