Impressions of force in visual perception of collision events: A test of the causal asymmetry hypothesis

White, Peter A.

doi:10.3758/bf03196815

Cited by 43 publications

(122 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

105

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In simple cases like this one, the presence of motion itself is enough for the assignment of an agent or patient role to an object. For example, when participants are asked to describe such an event, they will typically say "One ball set the other one into motion," but very few will say "One ball stopped the other," suggesting that they naturally associate motion and agency 2 (White, 2007). In order to study the roles of motion and contact on moral judgments, we designed a simple setting that included three interacting objects-the Actor, Victim, and Harm-where the Actor's behavior led to the Victim contacting the Harm, and subsequently dying.…”

Section: The Physical Aspect Of Causality and Its Implications To Mormentioning

confidence: 99%

Moral kinematics: The role of physical factors in moral judgments

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Harmful events often have a strong physical component-for instance, car accidents, plane crashes, fist fights, and military interventions. Yet there has been very little systematic work on the degree to which physical factors influence our moral judgments about harm. Since physical factors are related to our perception of causality, they should also influence our subsequent moral judgments. In three experiments, we tested this prediction, focusing in particular on the roles of motion and contact. In Experiment 1, we used abstract video stimuli and found that intervening on a harmful object was judged as being less bad than intervening directly on the victim, and that setting an object in motion was judged as being worse than redirecting an already moving object. Experiment 2 showed that participants were sensitive not only to the presence or absence of motion and contact, but also to the magnitudes and frequencies associated with these dimensions. Experiment 3 extended the findings from Experiment 1 to verbally presented moral dilemmas. These results suggest that domain-general processes play a larger role in moral cognition than is currently assumed.Keywords Moral judgments . Causality . Motion . Agency . Physical factorsIn this study, we asked a simple empirical question: Do people take physical factors into account when making moral judgments? At first glance, our ability to distinguish good from bad seems more or less independent from the way that we perceive the physical aspects of our surroundings. Moral principles such as "do no harm" are abstract and largely decontextualized, and many would argue that they have transcendental or sacred aspects embedded in them that go beyond the physical plane. Yet our cognitive system is attuned to the physical aspects of reality

show abstract

Section: The Physical Aspect Of Causality and Its Implications To Mormentioning

confidence: 99%

Moral kinematics: The role of physical factors in moral judgments

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, impressions of forces in visually perceived interactions do occur. The typical stimuli in the studies that have shown this are simple collision events in which a moving object contacts a stationary one, and the stationary one then moves off (White, 2007(White, , 2009a. White (2012) argued that these visual impressions of forces are derived from experiences of acting on objects.…”

Section: Actions On Objectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impetus theory in judgments about object motion: A new perspective

White

2012

Psychon Bull Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several tendencies found in explicit judgments about object motion have been interpreted as evidence that people possess a naive theory of impetus. The theory states that objects that are caused to move by other objects acquire force that determines the kind of motion exhibited by the object, and that this force gradually dissipates over time. I argue that the findings can better be understood as manifestations of a general understanding of externally caused motion based on experiences of acting on objects. Experiences of acting on objects yield the idea that properties of the cause of motion are transmitted to the effect object. This idea functions as a heuristic for explicit predictions of object motion under conditions of uncertainty. This accounts not only for the findings taken as evidence for the impetus theory, but also for several findings that fall outside the scope of the impetus theory. It has also been claimed that judgments about the location at which a moving object disappeared are influenced by the impetus theory. I argue that these judgments are better explained in a different way, as best-guess extrapolations made by the visual system as a practical guide to interactions with the object, such as interception.

show abstract

“…This notion is supported by the fact that in not one of Michotte's (1963) experiments did participants suggest that object B stopped the movement of object A. Recent studies have found additional evidence for an asymmetrical interpretation of the direction of force in causal events (White, 2006(White, , 2007.…”

Section: Perspectives On the Origin Of The Ability To Perceive Causesmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…However, mounting evidence has demonstrated that top-down knowledge about objects influences the impression of causality produced by watching a collision (launching) event. Namely, it has been noted that an impression of force seems to accompany the impression of causality produced by a visual launching event (White, 2007(White, , 2009). …”

Section: Perspectives On the Origin Of The Ability To Perceive Causesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the ability to intervene on the world in a causal manner has also received a great deal of attention as a potential mechanism by which causal knowledge is constructed and the ability to perceive causal relationships is derived (Muentener & Carey, 2010;Piaget, 1954;Rakison & Krogh, 2012;Sloman, 2005, Tenenbaum & Griffiths, 2003White, 2007White, , 2009White, , 2012. The mechanism(s) by which causal perception arises are not well understood.…”

Section: Introduction and Review Of Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mechanisms responsible for the development of causal perception in infancy.

Holt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impressions of force in visual perception of collision events: A test of the causal asymmetry hypothesis

Abstract: White, P. A. (2012). The experience of force: The role of haptic experience of forces in visual perception of object motion and interactions, mental simulation, and motion-related judgments. Psychological Bulletin, 138(4), 589-615.

Cited by 43 publications

References 11 publications

Moral kinematics: The role of physical factors in moral judgments

Moral kinematics: The role of physical factors in moral judgments

The impetus theory in judgments about object motion: A new perspective

Mechanisms responsible for the development of causal perception in infancy.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About