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

• Published in: Attention, perception & psychophysics Vol. 84; no. 5; pp. 1699 - 1717
• Main Authors: Shaffer, Dennis M., Greer, Kirsten M., Schaffer, Jackson T., Richardson, Clayton C., Thrasher, John
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New York Springer US 01.07.2022; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Behavioral Science and Psychology; Beliefs; Bias; Cognitive Psychology; Computers; Experiments; Individual Characteristics; Laboratory Equipment; Mechanics (Physics); Misconceptions; Motion; Perceptions; Physical Characteristics; Physics; Psychology; Velocity; Naïve physics; Intuitive beliefs; Anti-inertial motion
• ISSN: 1943-3921; 1943-393X
• DOI: 10.3758/s13414-022-02514-2

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.