Why do people like magic?

  Every day, we interact and influence our surrounding material and social environments. As a result, we develop various expectations about the progress of countless realities around us, and adjust our daily behavior accordingly. Some of these expectations arise from bumpy experiences or direct interactions with the world, while others originate in infancy and are firmly stored in our nervous system, unaffected by external stimuli. Scientists call the latter "core knowledge." There are many examples of core knowledge, such as knowing that solids cannot pass through walls and that things fall to the ground—all of these fall under the category of core knowledge.

  Magic performances captivate audiences by defying expectations. The results of magic contradict the audience's "core beliefs," which is why it's so fascinating. Even the most uninterested audience members display childlike curiosity in the presence of a skilled magician. So, how do infants react when faced with something that goes against their expectations? A new study investigates this question, and the findings may explain why magic holds appeal across age groups.

 Aimee E. Stahl and Lisa Feigenson from Johns Hopkins University believe that unexpected situations may simultaneously present unique learning opportunities. Previous research has shown that infants exhibit longer staring spells when things don't go as expected. For example, a ball passing through a wall instead of being blocked, or an actor walking towards a critical audience member instead of a kind one, are examples of unexpected behaviors. However, it was previously unknown whether the infants' interest in unusual behaviors had cognitive utility.

  Scientists have hypothesized that unexpected phenomena provide opportunities to learn about the world. If this hypothesis holds true, then objects that produce unexpected phenomena should be a priority for infants to acquire new information. They will search for information about these objects and manipulate and explore them in various ways, trying to understand why they produce strange phenomena.

  Researchers conducted a series of ingenious experiments on 110 11-month-old infants. First, they showed the infants videos of toy cars and balls hitting walls; in these scenarios, some toys would pass through the wall, while others wouldn't (and many other physically feasible and impractical scenarios existed). Afterward, the scientists showed the infants the same objects again, but this time with some new aspects: for example, the toy would make a sound when squeezed. Notably, the infants only associated the sound with the toy itself when it behaved in a way that contradicted their previous expectations. This means that infants don't learn new knowledge from all unexpected phenomena, but only from specific objects that violate their cognitive expectations.

  Next, the scientists showed the infants videos where some events conformed to basic principles, while others violated them, such as the solidity of objects (e.g., an object appearing to pass through a wall) and the need for support (e.g., an object appearing to float in mid-air without any support). Afterward, the infants had the opportunity to manipulate and play with the toys they had just seen (target objects) and a new toy (disruptive object). If the target toys had previously exhibited phenomena that violated basic principles, the infants spent more time manipulating them. If the target toys had previously exhibited phenomena that met their expectations, the infants played with each toy for a while, and for roughly the same amount of time. More interestingly, when children played with target objects that exhibited phenomena that violated expectations, their play style depended considerably on the form in which the target object violated expectations. Infants who saw a toy pass through a wall repeatedly banged the toy on the table, seemingly trying to see if it could still pass through objects, while infants who saw a toy floating in the air repeatedly threw the toy to the ground. In other words, children adjusted how they manipulated toys based on how the toys violated expectations. The divergence in these two behaviors exhibited by children suggests that infants' responses to unusual scenarios are not random, but rather a systematic assessment of their environment, much like the efforts scientists make when faced with unexpected> 

  The study concluded that unexpected events provide unique learning opportunities for infants and early children, whether these expectations are innate or learned.

But how do adults react when they encounter unusual events?

  As adults, we don't often encounter situations that defy our expectations, especially when they involve core principles of object behavior. Magic, however, is a notable exception—magic performances completely overturn our rational expectations: objects disappear, levitate, or even transform. We know that these unexpected phenomena provide unique learning opportunities for infant brains, but what if they also offer such opportunities to adult brains? The allure of magic performances may well lie in our innate desire to place our thoughts and actions in unexpected situations.

  In 2007, at the Magic of Consciousness Symposium in Las Vegas, I co-hosted with Stephen Macknik. At that time, Teller, the silent member of the magic duo Penn and Teller, aptly explained that we spend most of our lives trying to understand the various causes and effects of the world, and magic "provides a playground for these rational understandings." The world is as vast as a baby's playground, filled with miracles and opportunities every day. As we grow older, our knowledge expands, and fewer things amaze us; our playfulness diminishes. But magic always manages to successfully lead us to that enchanting playground deep within our hearts.

(By Susana Martinez-Conde & Stephen L. Macknik) Why do people like magic?

  Every day, we interact and influence our surrounding material and social environments. As a result, we develop various expectations about the progress of countless realities around us, and adjust our daily behavior accordingly. Some of these expectations arise from bumpy experiences or direct interactions with the world, while others originate in infancy and are firmly stored in our nervous system, unaffected by external stimuli. Scientists call the latter "core knowledge." There are many examples of core knowledge, such as knowing that solids cannot pass through walls and that things fall to the ground—all of these fall under the category of core knowledge.

  Magic performances captivate audiences by defying expectations. The results of magic contradict the audience's "core beliefs," which is why it's so fascinating. Even the most uninterested audience members display childlike curiosity in the presence of a skilled magician. So, how do infants react when faced with something that goes against their expectations? A new study investigates this question, and the findings may explain why magic holds appeal across age groups.

 Aimee E. Stahl and Lisa Feigenson from Johns Hopkins University believe that unexpected situations may simultaneously present unique learning opportunities. Previous research has shown that infants exhibit longer staring spells when things don't go as expected. For example, a ball passing through a wall instead of being blocked, or an actor walking towards a critical audience member instead of a kind one, are examples of unexpected behaviors. However, it was previously unknown whether the infants' interest in unusual behaviors had cognitive utility.

  Scientists have hypothesized that unexpected phenomena provide opportunities to learn about the world. If this hypothesis holds true, then objects that produce unexpected phenomena should be a priority for infants to acquire new information. They will search for information about these objects and manipulate and explore them in various ways, trying to understand why they produce strange phenomena.

  Researchers conducted a series of ingenious experiments on 110 11-month-old infants. First, they showed the infants videos of toy cars and balls hitting walls; in these scenarios, some toys would pass through the wall, while others wouldn't (and many other physically feasible and impractical scenarios existed). Afterward, the scientists showed the infants the same objects again, but this time with some new aspects: for example, the toy would make a sound when squeezed. Notably, the infants only associated the sound with the toy itself when it behaved in a way that contradicted their previous expectations. This means that infants don't learn new knowledge from all unexpected phenomena, but only from specific objects that violate their cognitive expectations.

  Next, the scientists showed the infants videos where some events conformed to basic principles, while others violated them, such as the solidity of objects (e.g., an object appearing to pass through a wall) and the need for support (e.g., an object appearing to float in mid-air without any support). Afterward, the infants had the opportunity to manipulate and play with the toys they had just seen (target objects) and a new toy (disruptive object). If the target toys had previously exhibited phenomena that violated basic principles, the infants spent more time manipulating them. If the target toys had previously exhibited phenomena that met their expectations, the infants played with each toy for a while, and for roughly the same amount of time. More interestingly, when children played with target objects that exhibited phenomena that violated expectations, their play style depended considerably on the form in which the target object violated expectations. Infants who saw a toy pass through a wall repeatedly banged the toy on the table, seemingly trying to see if it could still pass through objects, while infants who saw a toy floating in the air repeatedly threw the toy to the ground. In other words, children adjusted how they manipulated toys based on how the toys violated expectations. The divergence in these two behaviors exhibited by children suggests that infants' responses to unusual scenarios are not random, but rather a systematic assessment of their environment, much like the efforts scientists make when faced with unexpected> 

  The study concluded that unexpected events provide unique learning opportunities for infants and early children, whether these expectations are innate or learned.

But how do adults react when they encounter unusual events?

  As adults, we don't often encounter situations that defy our expectations, especially when they involve core principles of object behavior. Magic, however, is a notable exception—magic performances completely overturn our rational expectations: objects disappear, levitate, or even transform. We know that these unexpected phenomena provide unique learning opportunities for infant brains, but what if they also offer such opportunities to adult brains? The allure of magic performances may well lie in our innate desire to place our thoughts and actions in unexpected situations.

  In 2007, at the Magic of Consciousness Symposium in Las Vegas, I co-hosted with Stephen Macknik. At that time, Teller, the silent member of the magic duo Penn and Teller, aptly explained that we spend most of our lives trying to understand the various causes and effects of the world, and magic "provides a playground for these rational understandings." The world is as vast as a baby's playground, filled with miracles and opportunities every day. As we grow older, our knowledge expands, and fewer things amaze us; our playfulness diminishes. But magic always manages to successfully lead us to that enchanting playground deep within our hearts.

(Authors: Susana Martinez-Conde & Stephen L. Macknik)