Do you tend to see the bigger picture? Take the test!


Want to find out if you tend to focus on detail or prefer to see the bigger picture?  Then just look at the following picture and see if you can find the cat (click the picture to see a larger picture). People who find the cat in less than 30 seconds have a great eye for detail and aren’t at all creative, whilst those who struggle to see the furry fella tend to see the bigger picture and have a wonderful imagination (I just made that up). Thanks to Neil J.


132 comments on “Do you tend to see the bigger picture? Take the test!

  1. Damocles says:

    Yep seen it, got an air rifle? 😉

  2. ptah says:

    Spoon cat: There is no cat.

  3. Drew says:

    Found it after about. 2 minutes of hard searching

  4. Simon Taylor says:

    Spent five minutes, still can’t find it.

  5. I saw it almost straight away.

  6. Grid search did it for me

  7. Chris Martin says:

    20 seconds.

  8. Simon Taylor says:

    Found it by zooming in and scanning piece by piece…

  9. Suzanne says:

    There’s a cat?

  10. Shoot me. I knew my family was lying when they said I had no imagination, but I didn’t know I had this much imagination. It took me almost 8 minutes to find the critter, and then only because I magnified the picture several times, and then used the cursor keys to move the picture over the visible part of the screen.

    Of course, now. I have no way of not seeing it anymore. GRRRR…

  11. Johnny Fraser says:

    Ive got a better challenge, find the empty can of coke!

  12. makoho says:

    About 20 seconds to find the cat.

    It took me an additional 30 seconds to see the silhouette of a man carrying rubbish, another 10 to see the playing field of the World Series illuminated by 1,024,000 candles, and 10 more to realize it’s a garage heap.

  13. Paul Pearson says:

    Took a few minutes. I got the pic big, stood back, tried a polarizing filter, thought it was a cumulative kitty. Finally got it as I was giving up. And all my life I’ve been so good at finding p$%#y.

  14. Navneeth says:

    What about people who are told there is cat in the picture and some arbitrary rule about their imaginations?

  15. Adzcliff says:

    What a load of rubbish! (I’m first aren’t I??)

  16. Nigel says:

    Random searching proved useless. Try scanning left to right in imaginary lines; then you’ll spot it. Clever.

  17. anonymous says:

    reminds me of one of the books of Richard P. Feynman – “Surely you are joking Mr. Feyn(wise)man!”.

    • Berhard says:

      Please do not compare
      seem to be different leagues…
      even though both where joking sometimes…

    • anonymous says:

      I never meant to compare. Yeah, they do belong to different leagues.

  18. lifes says:

    Um,cat? Cant find it.

  19. Timo says:

    Not seen the cat so far, but a robot in the horizont. hmmm…

  20. Paul says:

    Took me about 1.5 mins. Interesting though – I identified the area of the dump where the cat was within about 20 seconds – I though – there is a cat there, but I just couldn’t see it. Kept coming back to that area, and eventually I saw it.
    Of course, maybe just random chance that happened, but feels like somehow the cognitive processes inside my brain are not quite talking to one another properly…

    • I had more or less the same experience. I had a feline, sorry feeling, that I’d seen a cat in an area, but then I had to rescan the area for quite a while to actually consiously see the cat.

  21. Anonymous says:

    First looked for a cat made out of the rubbish. No joy, read the comments and figured out it was a real cat and found it but scanning from bottom right to upper right and honestly found it within 2 seconds.

  22. Nick says:

    Saw the cat after about 30 seconds. I don’t agree with any of the generalizations that makes about my character, though.

  23. Steve Jones says:

    I found the cat fairly quickly. An old catalytic converter, much as you’d expect to find in a pile of old junk. That is what you meant isn’t it?

    Of course there’s another four legged, furry one too.

  24. Berhard says:

    “People who find the cat in less than 30 seconds have a great eye for detail and aren’t at all creative, whilst those who struggle to see the furry fella tend to see the bigger picture and have a wonderful imagination (I just made that up)”
    Is crap..
    Just to know how to scan for details in a big picture does not inlcude any correlation between creativity, imagination and knowledge.

    • Damocles says:

      Yeah he said that he made it up.

      It was apparently a sort of passing attempt at humour. Gosh! Humour on t’internet, who’d a thunk it?

  25. Paul Durrant says:

    Just under five minutes. 😦

  26. DiscoveredJoys says:

    Took me minutes to find it. If only it had twitched a little – my eye would have been jerked toward it…

    • DiscoveredJoys says:

      Mrs DiscoveredJoys, trained as a proof-reader and who delights in ‘hidden object’ puzzles, spotted the cat in seconds.

  27. Berber Anna says:

    There are too many things that look like cats in that picture. I give up on trying to find the actual cat. Never been good at these Where’s Waldo type things, even though I’m quite detail-oriented and (according to an IQ test I took at 15) not very good at seeing the big picture. So I don’t know how far that connection goes.

  28. Hilary says:

    Took me about 10 seconds. Would have been quicker if I’d started searching the opposite side of the photo.

  29. Andrew Wragg says:

    By cat do you mean a catalytic converter?

  30. Martin says:

    Are all these commenters in on it? There is no cat.

  31. Luigi says:

    I give up. Can’t find anything about cats (animals, writings, composite figure). Maybe is some kind of pun that I can’t understand?

  32. Anonymous says:

    took ages to find him… can’t believe he was so obvious

  33. Paul says:

    Took me about 20 seconds after using up the first 10 seconds thinking there was going to be a large “virtual cat” made up by a pattern in the rubbish. But no…it’s just a cat walking on the rubbish. Just scanned my eyes about until I saw the cat.

  34. avernl says:

    I took about twenty seconds to find it… odd, because it normally takes an eternity for me to solve those puzzles(and sometimes, I don’t even see the object I’m looking for even when it’s pointed out). I guess I’m becoming more experienced at this.
    Just hoping that this doesn’t mean I’m losing my creativity 😉

  35. I found lots of objects which looked like Halloween masks. Do I get a point, or am I simply insane?

  36. Nadia says:

    I’m glad you made it up, because it sounds like dodgy psychology, Richard. You also forgot to factor in whether the person wants to find the cat (as in, whether they like finding cats).

  37. awwells says:

    ” People who find the cat in less than 30 seconds have a great eye for detail and aren’t at all creative, whilst those who struggle to see the furry fella tend to see the bigger picture and have a wonderful imagination ”

    Could you tell us why?

  38. Alex Hall says:

    I’m not creative in the slightest but it took me less than 30 seconds to find it. Maybe it’s just because I like cats. And, is it me, or is that cat Photoshopped in there!?

  39. livedman says:

    Eventually found it! I thought the cat may have been hiding inside some containers or that there’s no cat and the test was whether to see if people would lie about seeing it.

  40. Damocles says:

    How can it take people so long to see a couple of cats in a photo?

  41. Pedro says:

    I’m not a creative person at all

  42. If you imagine an x y grid, x being the vertical, the cat is at about 4x 2y, 0 being the bottom left corner of course.

    I’d imagine there’s a much more acceptable and scientific way to describe that coordinate but I suck at maths.


    • Tim Dowd says:

      How big is the grid?

    • duhh, that would be helpful wouldn’t it? Sorry! I was thinking 10×10. Told you I suck at maths.

    • M says:

      You are right. And it may be wise to click on the image to enlarge it. It is hardly visible on the smaller version.

      Here is a good text version of the image:


    • I lol’d M, very creative way to describe it, although I think I may have spent more time finding your cat than the one in the picture!

    • Lazy T says:

      isn’t that a song?

  43. Anonymous says:

    Ok i spent 10 minutes looking at it now and i still cant see a cat..

    • Anonymous says:

      But if you mean the reflection on the black scrap thing right in the middle of the screen. Than yeah i might have spotted the cat, bear, dog looking furry animal.

    • Anonymous says:

      saw the cat.. -_-‘

  44. Anonymosity says:

    It took about 5 minutes for me. I was distracted by the idea that it was going to be some sort of fake or illusionary cat. Once I gave up looking, I found the real cat by doing the previously mentioned “cat scan”.

  45. mittfh says:

    It took me about 20 seconds. For those still looking, it’s a real cat, about half way up on the left, just under and to the right of the big yellow square thing and fairly well camouflaged.

  46. Nathan Neulinger says:

    Never saw the one on the left till it was pointed out. I saw the overall big cat made up of all of the rubbish first, but maybe that is as he said – good imagination… Have to squint to see it though…

  47. I think there’s a health and safety issue here … just sayin’

  48. Julia says:

    I see something that looks like it could be a cat. It’s too small for me to be sure.

  49. Holly says:

    This test has peaked my curiosity. Alas, my curiosity did not kill the cat.

  50. So maybe the cat is just not there for some of you and is for others? is it *gasp* Schrodinger’s Cat?

    Sorry, I figured the universe might collapse if someone didn’t bring it up.

  51. Vaahto says:

    Saw it in about 5-10 seconds. I got lucky though, as I hadn’t even looked at most of the picture by that time. I started at the bottom and went clockwise.

  52. FrankN.Stein says:

    25 secs. Thank you very much.

  53. after one minute could not find it. Stopped.

  54. Emma says:

    What cat? Is it an optical-illusion cat or a real cat? And what bit was Richard making up? I’m a details woman, I think, but I still haven’t seen the cat. Is this a trick question?

  55. Lazy T says:

    How did you get a photo of my garage?… it’s all useful!

  56. deepfield says:

    About five minutes to find the photoshopped-in cat.

  57. Ruddigore says:

    About 1 minute.

  58. Anonymous says:

    I thought it was a massive illusion and the rubbish made an image with the impression of a cat, so I was totally looking at it in the wrong way. One of the first times we’ve been asked to see an animal which is actually an animal…

  59. JB says:

    I saw it in about 20 seconds.

  60. Mervulon says:

    It’s Winther the Rabbit!!!

  61. TS says:

    It’s a Catmeleon.

  62. 14 seconds, BUT . . .

    It is just luck – it depends where you start, it depends on looking at the correct spot and a more organised, analytical mind would have taken longer with a process driven methodology.

    14 seconds, but it was just luck.

    Would be easier, were the cat really there.

  63. I see something that looks like it could be a cat. It’s too small for me to be sure.

    شات صوتي

  64. Anonymous says:

    Totally irritated. I have stared at this for ten minutes, and can see no cat whatsoever. My daughter glanced at it and saw it immediately.

    • I guess that’s why girls are such good programmers!

    • Anonymous says:

      I AM a girl!! 🙂 I finally found it, but I had to zoom way in and look at small sections at a time.

    • Anonymous says:

      I AM a girl!! 🙂 I finally found it, but I had to zoom way in and look at small sections at a time

    • I see. So I guess I should say “Girls who have no daughters” from now on! I don’t remember whether or not Ada Lovelace had a daughter. I need to verify that ^_^

    • Anonymous says:

      Goofy thing is that last week I went through a Waldo book and found them all within less than five minutes.

    • Unfortunately, our brains aren’t always that consistent. Some times they are less reliable than others.

      I remember that I once had to look for a bug in a programme I wrote and it took me over three weeks to find it. I consistently looked over it. I got so depressed over it, that my customer told me not to worry and simply start over. And then, hours later I discovered it. A z0 and a zO had been mixed up. That was the time a variable only had two significant characters…

      I’d say that if Waldo worked, you still have quite a while to go before you won’t recognise yourself in the mirror any longer! ^_^

  65. Anonymous says:

    It took me about 15 secs. Just started top centre and started to work round clockwise.

  66. Armageddon says:

    Took me about 2 seconds. I seriously need help.

  67. Deb says:

    Eradicating feral cats isn’t the whole answer as can be learned from one Australian experience.

    While cats aren’t entirely innocent, which is why I don’t own one, I think they often unfairly get the blame for the effects of human activity.

    • Deb says:

      I just realised that my post, above, is a practical example of the small picture versus the big picture! Cool!

  68. anibal says:

    creativity is only measur by achiving your goals

  69. chintan says:

    found it, but took about a minute

  70. vet,animals,dog,cat,find…

    […]Do you tend to see the bigger picture? Take the test! « Richard Wiseman[…]…

  71. Jean W says:

    I’m not so sure the image hasn’t been photoshopped; my neural circuits for recognising cats in tips are well established because I hunt them for the local shire, but I had to keep returning to the area my eyes were telling me the cat should be in for more than a minute before the synapses got the hippocampus feeding to the prefrontal cortex.
    It needed to make a whole new paradigm for a cat walking apparently horizontally across an apparently steep tip.

    The only photoshopping hints I can offer are that the cat’s tail is unconvincingly shadowed towards its tip, that the cat is not gracile enough for a tip-dweller – for example, she wouldn’t likely have the heavy undercarriage, even if pregnant – that the cat is not dirty enough around the face and paws, and that the posture doesn’t jibe with a cat’s careful negotiation of uneven ground.

  72. snowman991 says:

    It took me about 5 minutes to reveal it but I found it.

  73. GiSu says:

    This is the cat?! :S Too small for me 😛

  74. Lilliy says:

    I’ve found the cat after a long searching, but I don’t consider myself creative 😛

  75. Grace says:

    Just because someone is detail-oriented, and has strong senses, does not mean that they are any less creative than people who are big picture thinkers. It’s when someone becomes obsessed with the small details that they become uncreative, just as someone who thinks too big picture becomes uncreative when they forget about the details that will bring their ideas to fruition. You have to have a healthy balance between being detail-oriented and big picture thinking

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s