Magicians often trick spectators’ senses by relying on cognitive limitations. To do so, they use intuitive but age-old knowledge of human cognition. Research into the relationship between magic and psychology has been growing for a number of years now. This work offers an original ground for studying cognitive processes, while also providing the opportunity to discover processes that are still poorly understood. In this respect, the study of magic in psychology resembles the domain of “cryptozoology,” the name given to the search, real or humoristic, for unknown species. This article begins by briefly presenting some of the major research conducted over the past 10 years in the psychology of magic. We argue that, unfortunately, so far, no unknown cognitive species have been added to the “hunting bag” of these studies; in the second part of the article, we discuss the wide range of psychological facets of magic that are still to be explored.
Since the seminal study by Chun and Jiang (Cognitive Psychology, 36, 28-71, 1998), a large body of research based on the contextual-cueing paradigm has shown that the cognitive system is capable of extracting statistical contingencies from visual environments. Most of these studies have focused on how individuals learn regularities found within an intratrial temporal window: A context predicts the target position within a given trial. However, Ono, Jiang, and Kawahara (Journal of Experimental Psychology, 31, 703-712, 2005) provided evidence of an intertrial implicit-learning effect when a distractor configuration in preceding trials N - 1 predicted the target location in trials N. The aim of the present study was to gain further insight into this effect by examining whether it occurs when predictive relationships are impeded by interfering task-relevant noise (Experiments 2 and 3) or by a long delay (Experiments 1, 4, and 5). Our results replicated the intertrial contextual-cueing effect, which occurred in the condition of temporally close contingencies. However, there was no evidence of integration across long-range spatiotemporal contingencies, suggesting a temporal limitation of statistical learning.
In the vanishing ball illusion (VBI), a magician throws a ball up in the air twice, after which he pretends to toss it up again, when in fact it remains secretly concealed in his hand. Observers perceive an imaginary ball disappearing into the air. According to Kuhn and Land (2006), the VBI during the fake throw is mediated by the magician's gaze and/or head direction (also called Bsocial cues^) as he looks toward the imaginary ball. The aim of this article is to test an alternative interpretation. According to our hypothesis, the magician's social cues are not essential to the VBI. We compared the numbers of participants experiencing the VBI when the magician's social cues were directed toward the illusory ball and when the magician's social cues were either hidden behind a black mask (Exp. 1) or stationary (Exp. 2). The results showed that the number of observers experiencing the VBI was high (almost two-thirds of the participants), regardless of whether the magician's social cueing was directed toward the illusion, hidden behind a mask, or stationary. In a third experiment (Exp. 3), we replicated Kuhn and Land's initial results and attempted to further explain their Banti-illusion^social-cue effect. This study confirms that social cueing is not required in the VBI: Its presence did not increase the number of participants experiencing the illusion.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.