The apparent action causation: Using a magician forcing technique to investigate our illusory sense of agency over the outcome of our choices

We often fall victim of an illusory sense of control and agency over our thoughts and actions. Magicians are masters at exploiting these illusions and forcing techniques provide a powerful way to study apparent action causation – the illusion that our action caused the outcome we get. In this paper, we used the Criss-Cross force to study whether people can tell the difference between an action which had an impact on the outcome they get and one which has no impact. In the Criss-Cross force, participants are asked to cut to a card, and whilst they are genuinely free to cut the cards at any position, the cut does not impact the card they are given (i.e. they always get the top card). We investigate the psychological processes that underpin the success of this force. Experiment 1 (N=60) showed that participants cannot tell the difference between a forced and a controlled outcome. Experiment 2 (N=90) showed that contrary to common magicians’ knowledge, misdirection does not play a role in the success of the force. Finally, experiment 3 (N=60) suggests that rather than misdirection, an attribute substitution error explains why people fail to understand that their action do not have an impact on the outcome they get. Debriefings also shows the importance of participants’ expectations in the perception of the trick, as well as the role of prediction of the outcome in participants’ sense of agency over the events

Subtly encouraging more deliberate decisions: Using a forcing technique and population stereotype to investigate free will

Magicians’ forcing techniques allow them to covertly influence spectators’ choices. We used a type of force (Position Force) to investigate whether explicitly informing people that they are making a decision results in more deliberate decisions. The magician placed four face-down cards on the table in a horizontal row, after which the spectator was asked to select a card by pushing it forward. According to magicians and position effects literature, people should be more likely to choose a card in the third position from their left, because it can be easily reached. We manipulated whether participants were reminded that they were making a decision (explicit choice) or not (implicit choice) when asked to select one of the cards. Two experiments confirmed the efficiency of the Position Force — 52% of participants chose the target card. Explicitly informing participants of the decision impairs the success of the force, leading to a more deliberate choice. A range of awareness measures illustrates that participants were unaware of their stereotypical behaviours. Participants who chose the target card significantly underestimated the number of people who would have chosen the same card, and felt as free as the participants who chose another card. Finally, we tested an embodied-cognition idea, but our data suggest that different ways of holding an object do not affect the level of self-control they have over their actions. Results are discussed in terms of theoretical implications regarding free will, Wegner’s apparent mental causation, choice blindness and reachability effects

Forcing you to experience wonder: Unconsciously biasing people’s choice through strategic physical positioning

Magicians have developed powerful tools to covertly force a spectator to choose a specific card. We investigate the physical location force, in which four cards (from left to right: 1-2-3-4) are placed face-down on the table in a line, after which participants are asked to push out one card. The force is thought to rely on a behavioural bias in that people are more likely to choose the third card from their left. Participants felt that their choice was extremely free, yet 60% selected the 3rd card. There was no significant difference in estimates and feelings of freedom between those who chose the target card (i.e. 3rd card) and those who selected a different card, and they underestimated the actual proportion of people who selected the target card. These results illustrate that participants’ behaviour was heavily biased towards choosing the third card, but were oblivious to this bias

The Magician’s Choice: Providing illusory choice and sense of agency with the Equivoque forcing technique

Forcing techniques allow magicians to subtly influence spectators’ choices and the outcome of their actions, and they provide powerful tools to study decision-making and the illusory sense of agency and freedom over choices we make. We investigate the Equivoque force, a technique that exploits semantic ambiguities and people’s failure to notice inconsistencies, to ensure that a spectator ends up with a pre-determined outcome. Similarly to choice blindness paradigms, the Equivoque forces participants to end up with an item they did not choose in the first place. However, here, the subterfuge is accomplished in full view. In three experiments, we showed that the Equivoque is highly effective in providing participants an illusory sense of agency over the outcome of their actions, even after two repetitions of the trick (experiment 2), and using items for which pre-existing preferences can be present (experiment 3). Across all experiments, participants were oblivious to inconsistencies in the procedure used to guide their decisions, and they were genuinely surprised by the experimenter’s matching prediction. Contrary to our prediction, the Equivoque force did not significantly change participants’ preference for the chosen item. We discuss the results with regards to other illusions of agency (e.g. forcing, choice blindness), failures in noticing semantic inconsistencies (e.g Moses illusion), and issues surrounding choice-induced-preference literature

Mind Control Tricks: Magicians’ Forcing and Free Will

A new research program has recently emerged that investigates magicians’ mind control tricks, also called forces. This research highlights the psychological processes that underpin decision-making, illustrates the ease by which our decisions can be covertly influenced, and helps answer questions about our sense of free will and agency over choices

The Magician’s Choice: Providing illusory choice and sense of agency with the Equivoque forcing technique.

Forcing techniques allow magicians to subtly influence spectators’ choices and the outcome of their actions, and they provide powerful tools to study decision-making and the illusory sense of agency and freedom over choices we make. We investigate the Equivoque force, a technique that exploits semantic ambiguities and people’s failure to notice inconsistencies, to ensure that a spectator ends up with a pre-determined outcome. Similarly to choice blindness paradigms, the Equivoque forces participants to end up with an item they did not choose in the first place. However, here, the subterfuge is accomplished in full view. In three experiments, we showed that the Equivoque is highly effective in providing participants an illusory sense of agency over the outcome of their actions, even after 2 repetitions of the trick (experiment 2), and using items for which pre-existing preferences can be present (experiment 3). Across all experiments, participants were oblivious to inconsistencies in the procedure used to guide their decisions, and they were genuinely surprised by the experimenter’s matching prediction. Contrary to our prediction, the Equivoque force did not significantly change participants’ preference for the chosen item. We discuss the results with regards to other illusions of agency (e.g. forcing, choice blindness), failures in noticing semantic inconsistencies (e.g Moses illusion), and issues surrounding choice-induced-preference literature

A Psychologically-Based Taxonomy of Magicians’ Forcing Techniques

Magicians have developed a wide range of techniques to influence and control spectators’ choices of such things as card, word, or number. These techniques are what is called forcing. The present paper develops a psychologically-based taxonomy of forcing techniques with two goals in mind. Firstly, it should help uncover the different psychological mechanisms that underlie forcing techniques. Secondly, it should facilitate knowledge transfer between magicians and psychologists. The main division present two basic categories that can be used as a way of focussing separately on (1) decision-making processes and external influences on choices, and (2) links between sense of agency over action and outcome as well as the illusion of control over this outcome. This taxonomy allows us to clearly differentiate between forces in which there is or is not a free choice, and whether this choice has an impact on the following events

A psychologically based taxonomy of Magicians’ forcing Techniques: How magicians influence our choices, and how to use this to study psychological mechanisms

Magicians have developed a wide range of techniques to influence and control spectators’ choices of such things as card, word, or number. These techniques are what is called forcing. The present paper develops a psychologically-based taxonomy of forcing techniques with two goals in mind. Firstly, it should help uncover the different psychological mechanisms that underlie forcing techniques. Secondly, it should facilitate knowledge transfer between magicians and psychologists. The main division present two basic categories that can be used as a way of focussing separately on (1) decision-making processes and external influences on choices, and (2) links between sense of agency over action and outcome as well as the illusion of control over this outcome. This taxonomy allows us to clearly differentiate between forces in which there is or is not a free choice, and whether this choice has an impact on the following events

Priming (dis)Belief in Free Will with Illusionism

Abstract Previous research underscores the significance of free will belief in influencing a spectrum of socially relevant behaviors. To dissect the causal dynamics underpinning this belief, numerous paradigms have been devised. Yet, these interventions often yield marginal and nonspecific effects in free will belief. This study aims to pioneer a novel approach, employing illusionism-based approach, to manipulate free will belief and examine its downstream effects on social behaviors. In our initial exploration, we utilized an illusionist technique, transcending mere magic tricks, to cultivate or diminish free will belief among participants, aligning them with pro- or anti-free will stances, respectively. This intervention demonstrated a moderate, yet targeted, impact on the belief in free will, distinctively affecting it without spilling over to associated beliefs like determinism and dualism. A subsequent experiment sought to validate these effects and probe their potential influence on social bias, particularly the fundamental attribution error. Results echoed the manipulation's consistent sway on free will belief, albeit without extending to influence the fundamental attribution error. Collectively, our findings illuminate the capacity of illusionism to finely tune free will belief, albeit revealing scant evidence for a direct conduit from such beliefs to social behavior patterns