An anti-inertial motion bias explains people discounting inertial motion of carried objects.

Autor: Shaffer DM; Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University Mansfield, 1760 University Drive, Mansfield, OH, 44906, USA. shaffer.247@osu.edu., Greer KM; Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University Mansfield, 1760 University Drive, Mansfield, OH, 44906, USA.; Department of Health Behavior, Indiana University, Bloomington, USA., Schaffer JT; Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University Mansfield, 1760 University Drive, Mansfield, OH, 44906, USA., Richardson CC; Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University Mansfield, 1760 University Drive, Mansfield, OH, 44906, USA., Thrasher J; Department of Art, The Ohio State University Mansfield, Mansfield, OH, USA.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Attention, perception & psychophysics [Atten Percept Psychophys] 2022 Jul; Vol. 84 (5), pp. 1699-1717. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 May 24.
DOI: 10.3758/s13414-022-02514-2
Abstrakt: In this paper we propose an anti-inertial motion (AIM) bias that can explain several intuitive physics beliefs including the straight-down belief and beliefs held concerning the pendulum problem. We show how the AIM bias also explains two new beliefs that we explore - a straight-up-and-down belief as well as a straight-out/backward bias that occurs for objects traveling in one plane that are then thrown in another plane, ostensibly affording a greater opportunity for perception of canonical motion. We then show how the AIM bias in general is invariant across perceived/imagined speed of the object carrier, only altering percentages of straight-out from backward responses, and why occluding the carrier once the object is released into a second plane does not result in more veridical perception. The AIM bias serves as a simple explanation for a family of beliefs including those in the current paper as well as those shown in previous work.
(© 2022. The Psychonomic Society, Inc.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: