Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have been shown to be blind, often underutilizing visual inputs even on tasks that require visual reasoning. In this work, we demonstrate that VLMs are selectively blind. They modulate the attention to visual inputs based on linguistic framing even when alternative framings demand identical visual reasoning. Using visual attention as a probe, we quantify how framing alters both the amount and distribution of attention over the image. Constrained framings, such as multiple choice and yes/no, induce substantially lower attention to image context compared to open-ended, reduce focus on task-relevant regions, and shift attention towards uninformative tokens. We further demonstrate that this attention misallocation is a key mechanism contributing to degraded accuracy and cross-framing inconsistency. Building on this mechanism, we evaluate whether common prompting strategies mitigate framing-induced blindness. We find that simple image-focused instructions provide limited benefit, while structured reasoning and grounding prompts partially restore target-region attention and reduce, but do not eliminate, cross-framing inconsistency. Our findings suggest that question framing and prompting should be considered part of VLM evaluation to better reveal models’ visual capability.

Charts are a crucial visual medium for communicating and representing information. While Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have made progress on chart question answering (CQA), the task remains challenging, particularly when models attend to irrelevant regions of the chart. In this work, we present ChartGaze, a new eye-tracking dataset that captures human gaze patterns during chart reasoning tasks. Through a systematic comparison of human and model attention, we find that LVLMs often diverge from human gaze, leading to reduced interpretability and accuracy. To address this, we propose a gaze-guided attention refinement that aligns image-text attention with human fixations. Our approach improves both answer accuracy and attention alignment, yielding gains of up to 2.56 percentage points across multiple models. These results demonstrate the promise of incorporating human gaze to enhance both the reasoning quality and interpretability of chart-focused LVLMs.

Vision-language Models (VLMs) have emerged as general-purpose tools for addressing a variety of complex computer vision problems. Such models have been shown to be highly capable, but, at the same time, lacking some basic visual understanding skills. In this paper, we set out to understand the limitations of SoTA VLMs on fundamental visual tasks (object classification, spatial understanding, and ability to delineate individual object instances through counting), by constructing a series of tests that probe which components of design, specifically, may be lacking. Importantly, we go significantly beyond the current benchmarks, which simply measure the final performance of VLM response, by also comparing and contrasting it to the performance of probes trained directly on features obtained from the visual encoder, intermediate vision-language projection and LLM-decoder output. In doing so, we uncover shortcomings in VLMs and make a number of important observations about their capabilities, robustness and how they process visual information. We hope our insights will guide progress in further improving VLMs.