IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jpubli/v10y2022i4p33-d923279.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What the Neuroscience and Psychology of Magic Reveal about Misinformation

Author

Listed:
  • Robert G. Alexander

    (Departments of Ophthalmology, Neurology, and Physiology & Pharmacology, State University of New York Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY 11203, USA)

  • Stephen L. Macknik

    (Departments of Ophthalmology, Neurology, and Physiology & Pharmacology, State University of New York Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY 11203, USA)

  • Susana Martinez-Conde

    (Departments of Ophthalmology, Neurology, and Physiology & Pharmacology, State University of New York Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY 11203, USA)

Abstract

When we believe misinformation, we have succumbed to an illusion: our perception or interpretation of the world does not match reality. We often trust misinformation for reasons that are unrelated to an objective, critical interpretation of the available data: Key facts go unnoticed or unreported. Overwhelming information prevents the formulation of alternative explanations. Statements become more believable every time they are repeated. Events are reframed or given “spin” to mislead audiences. In magic shows, illusionists apply similar techniques to convince spectators that false and even seemingly impossible events have happened. Yet, many magicians are “honest liars”, asking audiences to suspend their disbelief only during the performance, for the sole purpose of entertainment. Magic misdirection has been studied in the lab for over a century. Psychological research has sought to understand magic from a scientific perspective and to apply the tools of magic to the understanding of cognitive and perceptual processes. More recently, neuroscientific investigations have also explored the relationship between magic illusions and their underlying brain mechanisms. We propose that the insights gained from such studies can be applied to understanding the prevalence and success of misinformation. Here, we review some of the common factors in how people experience magic during a performance and are subject to misinformation in their daily lives. Considering these factors will be important in reducing misinformation and encouraging critical thinking in society.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert G. Alexander & Stephen L. Macknik & Susana Martinez-Conde, 2022. "What the Neuroscience and Psychology of Magic Reveal about Misinformation," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-19, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:10:y:2022:i:4:p:33-:d:923279
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/10/4/33/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/10/4/33/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tirin Moore & Katherine M. Armstrong, 2003. "Selective gating of visual signals by microstimulation of frontal cortex," Nature, Nature, vol. 421(6921), pages 370-373, January.
    2. Lindita Camaj, 2019. "From Selective Exposure to Selective Information Processing: A Motivated Reasoning Approach," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 8-11.
    3. Douglas Guilbeault & Joshua Becker & Damon Centola, 2018. "Social learning and partisan bias in the interpretation of climate trends," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 115(39), pages 9714-9719, September.
    4. Daniel Kahneman, 2003. "Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1449-1475, December.
    5. Benlian, Alexander, 2015. "Web Personalization Cues and their Differential Effects on User Assessments of Website Value," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 74450, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    6. Philipp Schmid & Cornelia Betsch, 2019. "Effective strategies for rebutting science denialism in public discussions," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(9), pages 931-939, September.
    7. Stefan Treue & Julio C. Martínez Trujillo, 1999. "Feature-based attention influences motion processing gain in macaque visual cortex," Nature, Nature, vol. 399(6736), pages 575-579, June.
    8. Islam, A.K.M. Najmul & Laato, Samuli & Talukder, Shamim & Sutinen, Erkki, 2020. "Misinformation sharing and social media fatigue during COVID-19: An affordance and cognitive load perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    9. Benlian, Alexander, 2015. "Web Personalization Cues and their Differential Effects on User Assessments of Website Value," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 73386, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    10. Lotta Stille & Emelie Norin & Sverker Sikström, 2017. "Self-delivered misinformation - Merging the choice blindness and misinformation effect paradigms," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-17, March.
    11. Amélie Yavchitz & Isabelle Boutron & Aida Bafeta & Ibrahim Marroun & Pierre Charles & Jean Mantz & Philippe Ravaud, 2012. "Misrepresentation of Randomized Controlled Trials in Press Releases and News Coverage: A Cohort Study," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(9), pages 1-11, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. José Alberto Martínez-González & Carmen D. Álvarez-Albelo, 2021. "Influence of Site Personalization and First Impression on Young Consumers’ Loyalty to Tourism Websites," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17, January.
    2. Cloarec, Julien, 2020. "The personalization–privacy paradox in the attention economy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    3. Grigorios, Lamprinakos & Magrizos, Solon & Kostopoulos, Ioannis & Drossos, Dimitrios & Santos, David, 2022. "Overt and covert customer data collection in online personalized advertising: The role of user emotions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 308-320.
    4. Alnawas, Ibrahim & Al Khateeb, Amr & El Hedhli, Kamel, 2023. "The effects of app-related factors on app stickiness: The role of cognitive and emotional app relationship quality," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    5. Martin Adam & Konstantin Roethke & Alexander Benlian, 2022. "Gamblified digital product offerings: an experimental study of loot box menu designs," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(2), pages 971-986, June.
    6. Dominick Werner & Martin Adam & Alexander Benlian, 2022. "Empowering users to control ads and its effects on website stickiness," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(3), pages 1373-1397, September.
    7. Jia, Lin & Xue, Geng & Fu, Yuwei & Xu, Longjia, 2018. "Factors affecting consumers’ acceptance of e-commerce consumer credit service," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 103-110.
    8. Antonia Köster & Christian Matt & Thomas Hess, 2021. "Do All Roads Lead to Rome? Exploring the Relationship Between Social Referrals, Referral Propensity and Stickiness to Video-on-Demand Websites," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 63(4), pages 349-366, August.
    9. David Schneider & Johannes Klumpe & Martin Adam & Alexander Benlian, 2020. "Nudging users into digital service solutions," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(4), pages 863-881, December.
    10. Oliver Francis Koch & Alexander Benlian, 2017. "The effect of free sampling strategies on freemium conversion rates," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 27(1), pages 67-76, February.
    11. Adam, Martin & Röthke, Konstantin & Benlian, Alexander, 2022. "Gamblified digital product offerings: an experimental study of loot box menu designs," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 127115, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    12. Wenjun Cai & Jibao Gu & Jianlin Wu, 2021. "How Entrepreneurship Education and Social Capital Promote Nascent Entrepreneurial Behaviours: The Mediating Roles of Entrepreneurial Passion and Self-Efficacy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-11, October.
    13. Johannes Klumpe & Oliver Francis Koch & Alexander Benlian, 2020. "How pull vs. push information delivery and social proof affect information disclosure in location based services," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(3), pages 569-586, September.
    14. Chen, Qi & Feng, Yuqiang & Liu, Luning & Tian, Xianyun, 2019. "Understanding consumers’ reactance of online personalized advertising: A new scheme of rational choice from a perspective of negative effects," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 53-64.
    15. Schreiner, Timo & Rese, Alexandra & Baier, Daniel, 2019. "Multichannel personalization: Identifying consumer preferences for product recommendations in advertisements across different media channels," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 87-99.
    16. Yulin Hswen & Nguemdjo Ulrich & Yom-Tom Elad & Bruno Ventelou, 2022. "Economics of attention: The gender-based bing communication study on depression," Post-Print hal-03545595, HAL.
    17. Winter, Peter, 2007. "Managerial Risk Accounting and Control – A German perspective," MPRA Paper 8185, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. J. Silvestre, & T. Araújo & M. St. Aubyn, 2016. "Economic growth and individual satisfaction in an agent-based economy," Working Papers Department of Economics 2016/19, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    19. Luigi Guiso, 2015. "A Test of Narrow Framing and its Origin," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 1(1), pages 61-100, March.
    20. Lex Borghans & Angela Lee Duckworth & James J. Heckman & Bas ter Weel, 2008. "The Economics and Psychology of Personality Traits," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 43(4).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:10:y:2022:i:4:p:33-:d:923279. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.