Beyond the Tricks: The Science and Comparative Cognition of Magic.

Magic is an art form that has fascinated humans for centuries. Recently, the techniques used by magicians to make their audience experience the impossible have attracted the attention of psychologists, who, in just a couple of decades, have produced a large amount of research regarding how these effects operate, focusing on the blind spots in perception and roadblocks in cognition that magic techniques exploit. Most recently, this investigation has given a pathway to a new line of research that uses magic effects to explore the cognitive abilities of nonhuman animals. This new branch of the scientific study of magic has already yielded new evidence illustrating the power of magic effects as a psychological tool for nonhuman animals. This review aims to give a thorough overview of the research on both the human and nonhuman perception of magic effects by critically illustrating the most prominent works of both fields of inquiry.

Magic Curiosity Arousing Tricks (MagicCATs): A novel stimulus collection to induce epistemic emotions.

There has been considerable interest in empirical research on epistemic emotions, i.e., emotions related to knowledge-generating qualities of cognitive tasks and activities such as curiosity, interest, and surprise. One big challenge when studying epistemic emotions is systematically inducting these emotions in restricted experimental settings. The current study created a novel stimulus set called Magic Curiosity Arousing Tricks (MagicCATs): a collection of 166 short magic trick video clips that aim to induce a variety of epistemic emotions. MagicCATs are freely available for research and can be used in a variety of ways to examine epistemic emotions. Rating data also support that the magic tricks elicit a variety of epistemic emotions with sufficient inter-stimulus variability, demonstrating good psychometric properties for their use in psychological experiments.

Forcing the issue: Little psychological influence in a magician's paradigm.

Forcing is usually described as the effect in which stage magicians covertly influence decisions made by spectators. The phenomenon has been subject to a number of recent articles and is typically placed within the context of social influence, priming, decision making, awareness, free will, and the science of magic. In the present paper I will argue that forcing researchers, when framing and describing the phenomenon, have exaggerated what magicians typically achieve with the technique. Specifically, the magician is said to influence and manipulate the spectator's decision when in fact the vast majority of forces do not include any such influence. The consequence of this misrepresentation is that psychologists will be led to believe that the forcing phenomenon has more to contribute to priming and the psychology of influence than it actually does.

Visual Cognition and the Science of Magic.

A number of authors have argued that the art of conjuring can assist the development of theories and knowledge in visual cognition and psychology more broadly. A central assumption of the so-called science of magic is that magicians possess particular insight into human cognition. In a series of experiments, we tested the Insight hypothesis by assessing three factors that magicians argue are important for a popular illusion. Participants viewed videos of a magician performing the French Drop sleight whilst gaze, motion, and muscular tension were manipulated across experiments. Contrary to what the community of conjurers state, results showed that none of these influenced the perceived success of the effect. We also found that a visual priming technique, one suggested of many and used by an eminent magician, does not influence participant responses. Overall, these findings fail to support the Insight hypothesis. We suggest that scientists of magic have erroneously imbued magicians with insights they do not possess.

Manual action expectation and biomechanical ability in three species of New World monkey.

Being able to anticipate another's actions is a crucial ability for social animals because it allows for coordinated reactions. However, little is known regarding how hand morphology and biomechanical ability influences such predictions. Sleight of hand magic capitalizes on the observer's expectations of specific manual movements,1,2 making it an optimal model to investigate the intersection between the ability to manually produce an action and the ability to predict the actions of others. The French drop effect involves mimicking a hand-to-hand object transfer by pantomiming a partially occluded precision grip. Therefore, to be misled by it, the observer ought to infer the opposing movement of the magician's thumb.3 Here, we report how three species of platyrrhine with inherently distinct biomechanical ability4,5,6-common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus), Humboldt's squirrel monkeys (Saimiri cassiquiarensis), and yellow-breasted capuchins (Sapajus xanthosternos)-experienced this effect. Additionally, we included an adapted version of the trick using a grip that all primates can perform (power grip), thus removing the opposing thumb as the causal agent of the effect. When observing the French drop, only the species with full or partial opposable thumbs were misled by it, just like humans. Conversely, the adapted version of the trick misled all three monkey species, regardless of their manual anatomy. The results provide evidence of a strong interaction between the physical ability to approximate a manual movement and the predictions primates make when observing the actions of others, highlighting the importance of physical factors in shaping the perception of actions.