Advertisement

Axiomathes

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 485–524 | Cite as

Phenomenal Causality II: Integration and Implication

  • Timothy L. HubbardEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

The empirical literature on phenomenal causality (the notion that causality can be perceived) is reviewed. Different potential types of phenomenal causality and variables that influence phenomenal causality were considered in Part I (Hubbard 2012b) of this two-part series. In Part II, broader questions regarding properties of phenomenal causality and connections of phenomenal causality to other perceptual or cognitive phenomena (different types of phenomenal causality, effects of spatial and temporal variance, phenomenal causality in infancy, effects of object properties, naïve physics, spatial localization, other illusions, amodal completion, Gestalt principles of perceptual grouping, effects of context, differences between physical and social causality, effects of learning and experience, individual differences, effects of predictability, asymmetry in phenomenal causality, differences between perceived causality and perceived force, phenomenal causality in nonhuman animals) are considered. Potential mechanisms of phenomenal causality (inference from contiguity, a priori understanding, ampliation, perceptual learning, stimulus activity, beliefs regarding kinematics, haptic experience, beliefs regarding impetus, postdiction, innateness, modularity, specific neural structures) are also considered.

Keywords

Phenomenal causality Launching effect Perception of causality Causal impression Causal representation Intentionality Spatial representation Michotte 

References

  1. Alba JW, Hasher L (1983) Is memory schematic? Psychol Bull 93:203–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Albert MK (2007) Mechanisms of modal and amodal interpolation. Psychol Rev 114:455–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnheim R (1974) Art and visual perception: a psychology of the creative eye (the new version). University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  4. Arnheim R (1988) Visual dynamics. Sci Am 76:585–591Google Scholar
  5. Bartley SH, Wilkinson FR (1953) Some factors in the production of gamma movement. J Psychol 36:201–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bassili JN (1976) Temporal and spatial contingencies in the perception of social events. J Pers Soc Psychol 33:680–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beasley NA (1968) The extent of individual differences in the perception of causality. Can J Psychol 22:399–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Belanger ND, Desrochers S (2001) Can 6-month old infants process causality in different types of causal events? Br J Dev Psychol 19:11–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Berry DS, Springer K (1993) Structure, motion, and preschoolers’ perceptions of social causality. Ecol Psychol 5:273–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Berry DS, Misovich SJ, Kean KJ, Baron RM (1992) Effects of disruption of structure and motion on perceptions of social causality. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 18:237–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Blakemore SJ, Fonlupt P, Pachot-Clouard M, Darmon C, Boyer P, Meltzoff AN, Segebarth C, Decety J (2001) How the brain perceives causality: an event-related fMRI study. NeuroReport 12:3741–3746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Blakemore SJ, Boyer P, Pachot-Clouard M, Meltzoff A, Segebarth C, Decety J (2003) The detection of contingency and animacy from simple animations in the human brain. Cereb Cortex 13:837–844CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bowler DM, Thommen E (2000) Attribution of mechanical and social causality to animated displays by children with autism. Autism 4:147–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Boyle DG (1960) A contribution to the study of phenomenal causation. Quart J Exp Psychol 12:171–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brown HV, Miles TR (1969) Prior stimulation and the perception of causality. Quart J Exp Psychol 21:134–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Buehner MJ, Humphreys GR (2010) Causal contraction: spatial binding in the perception of collision events. Psychol Sci 21:44–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bullock M, Gelman R, Baillargeon R (1982) The development of causal reasoning. In: Friedman WJ (ed) The developmental psychology of time. Academic Press, New York, pp 209–254Google Scholar
  18. Burke L (1952) On the tunnel effect. Quart J Exp Psychol 4:121–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Castelli F, Happe F, Frith U, Frith C (2000) Movement and mind: a functional imaging study of perception and interpretation of complex intentional movement patterns. NeuroImage 12:314–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Choi H, Scholl BJ (2004) Effects of grouping and attention on the perception of causality. Percept Psychophys 66:926–942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Choi H, Scholl BJ (2006a) Perceiving causality after the fact: postdiction in the temporal dynamics of causal perception. Perception 35:385–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Choi H, Scholl BJ (2006b) Measuring causal perception: connections to representational momentum? Acta Psychol 123:91–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cicchino JB, Aslin RN, Rakison DH (2011) Correspondences between what infants see and know about causal and self-propelled motion. Cognition 118:171–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Cohen LB, Amsel G (1998) Precursors to infants’ perception of the causality of a simple event. Infant Behav Dev 21:713–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cohen LB, Oakes LM (1993) How infants perceive a simple causal event. Dev Psychol 29:421–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Congiu S, Schlottmann A, Ray E (2010) Unimpaired perception of social and physical causality, but impaired perception of animacy in high functioning children with autism. J Autism Dev Disord 40:39–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Corballis PM (2003) Visuospatial processing and the right-hemisphere interpreter. Brain Cogn 53:171–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Corballis PM, Fendrich R, Shapley RM, Gazzaniga MS (1999) Illusory contour perception and amodal boundary completion: evidence of a dissociation following callosotomy. J Cogn Neurosci 11:459–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Coren S, Girgus JS (1980) Principles of perceptual organization and spatial distortion: the Gestalt illusions. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 6:404–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. De sa Teixeira NA, de Oliveira AM, Viegas R (2008) Functional approach to the integration of kinematic and dynamic variables in causal perception: is there a link between phenomenology and behavioral responses? Jpn Psychol Res 50:232–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. De sa Teixeira NA, de Oliveira AM, Amorim M-A (2010) Combined effects of mass and velocity on forward displacement and phenomenological ratings: a functional measurement approach to the momentum metaphor. Psicologica 31:659–676Google Scholar
  32. Dennett DC (1987) The intentional stance. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  33. Dennett DC (1997) True believers: the intentional strategy and why it works. In: Haugeland J (ed) Mind design II. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 57–79Google Scholar
  34. Desrochers S (1999) Infants’ processing of causal and noncausal events at 3.5 months of age. J Genet Psychol 160:294–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Dittrich WH, Lea SEG (1994) Visual perception of intentional motion. Perception 23:253–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Eagleman DM, Sejnowski TJ (2000) Motion integration and postdiction in visual awareness. Science 287:2036–2038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Eagleman DM, Sejnowski TJ (2003) The line-motion illusion can be reversed by motion signals after the line disappears. Perception 32:963–968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Falmier O, Young ME (2008) The impact of object animacy on the appraisal of causality. Am J Psychol 121:473–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Finke RA, Freyd JJ, Shyi GCW (1986) Implied velocity and acceleration induce transformations of visual memory. J Exp Psychol Gen 115:175–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Flombaum JI, Scholl BJ (2006) A temporal same-object advantage in the tunnel effect: facilitated change detection for persisting object. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 32:840–853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Fodor JA (1983) The modularity of mind. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  42. Fonlupt P (2003) Perception and judgment of physical causality involve different brain structures. Cogn Brain Res 17:248–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Fugelsang JA, Roser ME, Corballis PM, Gazzaniga MS, Dunbar KN (2005) Brain mechanisms underlying perceptual causality. Cogn Brain Res 24:41–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Gallager S, Sørensen JB (2006) Experimenting with phenomenology. Conscious Cogn 15:119–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Gao T, Newman GE, Scholl BJ (2009) The psychophysics of chasing: a case study in the perception of animacy. Cogn Psychol 59:154–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Gao T, McCarthy G, Scholl BJ (2010) The wolfpack effect: perception of animacy irresistibly influences interactive behavior. Psychol Sci 21:1845–1853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Gelman R, Durgin F, Kaufman L (1995) Distinguishing animates and inanimates: not by motion alone. In: Sperber D, Premack D, Premack AJ (eds) Causal cognition: a multidisciplinary debate. Clarendon, Oxford, pp 150–184Google Scholar
  48. Gerbino W, Salmaso D (1987) The effect of amodal completion on visual matching. Acta Psychol 65:25–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Gibbs RW Jr (2005) Embodiment and cognitive science. Cambridge University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Guski R, Troje N (2003) Audiovisual phenomenal causality. Percept Psychophys 65:789–800CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Han S, Mao L, Qin J, Friederici AD, Ge J (2011) Functional roles and cultural modulations of the medial prefrontal and parietal activity associated with causal attribution. Neuropsychologia 49:83–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Harrower MR (1929) Some experiments on the nature of gamma movement. Psychologische Forschung 13:55–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Heider F, Simmel M (1944) An experimental study of apparent behavior. Am J Exp Psychol 57:243–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Henle M (1984) Isomorphism: setting the record straight. Psychol Res Psychol Forsch 46:317–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Hindmarch I (1973) Eye movements and the perception of phenomenal causality. Psychologica Belgica 13:17–23Google Scholar
  56. Houssiadas L (1964) Effects of ‘set’ and intellectual level on the perception of causality. Acta Psychol 22:155–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Hubbard TL (1996) The importance of a consideration of qualia to imagery and cognition. Conscious Cogn 5:327–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Hubbard TL (1999) How consequences of physical principles influence mental representation: the environmental invariants hypothesis. In: Killeen PR, Uttal WR (eds) Fechner Day 99: The end of 20th century psychophysics. Proceedings of the 15th annual meeting of the international society for psychophysics. The International Society for Psychophysics, Tempe, pp 274–279Google Scholar
  59. Hubbard TL (2004) The perception of causality: Insights from Michotte’s launching effect, naive impetus theory, and representational momentum. In: Oliveira AM, Teixeira MP, Borges GF, Ferro MJ (eds) Fechner Day 2004. The International Society for Psychophysics, Coimbra, pp 116–121Google Scholar
  60. Hubbard TL (2005) Representational momentum and related displacements in spatial memory: a review of the findings. Psychon Bull Rev 12:822–851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Hubbard TL (2006) Bridging the gap: possible roles and contributions of representational momentum. Psicologica 27:1–34Google Scholar
  62. Hubbard TL (2011) Extending pragnanz: Dynamic aspects of mental representation and Gestalt principles. In: Albertazzi L, van Tonder G, Vishwanath D (eds) Perception beyond inference: the information content of visual processes. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 75–108Google Scholar
  63. Hubbard TL (2012a) Launching, entraining, and representational momentum: Evidence consistent with an impetus heuristic in the perception of causality. Axiomathes. doi: 10.1007/s10516-012-9186-z
  64. Hubbard TL (2012b) Phenomenal causality I: varieties and variables. Axiomathes. doi: 10.1007/s10516-012-9198-8
  65. Hubbard TL (2012c) Visual perception of force: comment on White (2012). Psychol Bull 138:616–623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Hubbard TL, Favretto A (2003) Naive impetus and Michotte’s “Tool Effect:” Evidence from representational momentum. Psychol Res Psychol Forsch 67:134–152Google Scholar
  67. Hubbard TL, Ruppel SE (2002) A possible role of naive impetus in Michotte’s “Launching Effect:” Evidence from representational momentum. Vis Cogn 9:153–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Hubbard TL, Ruppel SE (2012) Ratings of causality and force in launching and shattering. Paper presented at the 53rd annual meeting of the psychonomic society, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  69. Hubbard TL, Blessum JA, Ruppel SE (2001) Representational momentum and Michotte’s (1946/1963) “Launching Effect” paradigm. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 27:294–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Hubbard TL, Ruppel SE, Courtney JR (2005) The force of appearance: gamma movement, naive impetus, and representational momentum. Psicologica 26:209–228Google Scholar
  71. Hume D (1960) A treatise of human nature. Clarendon, Oxford. (Original work published 1740)Google Scholar
  72. Hume D (1977) An enquiry concerning human understanding. Hackett, Indianapolis. (Original work published 1748)Google Scholar
  73. Jansson G (1964) Measurement of eye movements during a Michotte launching event. Scand J Psychol 5:153–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Johansson G (1973) Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis. Percept Psychophys 14:201–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Jordan JS, Hunsinger M (2008) Learned patterns of action-effect anticipation contribute to the spatial displacement of continuously moving stimuli. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 34:113–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Jordan JS, Knoblich G (2004) Spatial perception and control. Psychon Bull Rev 11:54–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Kaiser MK, Proffitt DR, Whelan SM, Hecht H (1992) The influence of animation on dynamical judgments. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 18:669–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Kanizsa G (1979) Organization in vision: essays on Gestalt psychology. Praeger, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  79. Kanizsa G, Vicario G (1968) The perception of intentional reaction. In: Kanizsa G, Vicario G (eds) Experimental research on perception. University of Trieste, Treiste, pp 71–126Google Scholar
  80. Kant I (1950) Prolegomena to any future metaphysics (trans: Beck LW). Bobbs-Merrill Company, Indianapolis. (Original work published 1783)Google Scholar
  81. Kant I (1965) Critique of pure reason (trans: Smith NK). St. Martin’s Press, New York. (Original work published 1787)Google Scholar
  82. Kawachi Y, Gyoba J (2006) A new response-time measure of object persistence in the tunnel effect. Acta Psychol 123:73–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Kiritani Y (1999) Perceptual causality in the amodal completion of kinetic structures. Psychol Res Psychol Forsch 62:255–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Kotovsky L, Baillargeon R (1998) The development of calibration-based reasoning about collision events in young infants. Cognition 67:311–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Kotovsky L, Baillargeon R (2000) Reasoning about collisions involving inert objects in 7.5-month-old infants. Dev Sci 3:344–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Kozhevnikov M, Hegarty M (2001) Impetus beliefs as default heuristics: dissociation between explicit and implicit knowledge about motion. Psychon Bull Rev 8:439–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Leslie AM (1982) The perception of causality in infants. Perception 11:173–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Leslie AM (1984) Spatiotemporal continuity and the perception of causality in infants. Perception 13:287–305Google Scholar
  89. Leslie AM (1986) Getting development off the ground: modularity and the infant’s perception of causality. In: van Gest P (ed) Theory building in development. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 405–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Leslie AM (1988) The necessity of illusion: Perception and thought in infancy. In: Weiskrantz L (ed) Thought without language. Clarendon Press/Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 185–210Google Scholar
  91. Leslie AM (1994) ToMM, ToBy, and agency: core architecture and domain specificity. In: Hirschfield L, Gelman S (eds) Mapping the mind: domain specificity in cognition and culture. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 119–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Leslie AM (1995) A theory of agency. In: Sperber D, Premack D, Premack AJ (eds) Causal cognition: a multidisciplinary debate. Clarendon, Oxford, pp 121–141Google Scholar
  93. Leslie AM, Keeble S (1987) Do six-month-old infants perceive causality? Cognition 25:265–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Leyton M (1989) Inferring causal history from shape. Cogn Sci 13:357–387Google Scholar
  95. Leyton M (1992) Symmetry, causality, mind. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  96. Malle BF (2006) How the mind explains behavior: folk explanations, meaning, and social interaction. MIT Press/Bradford Books, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  97. McCloskey M (1983) Naive theories of motion. In: Gentner D, Stevens AL (eds) Mental models. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 299–324Google Scholar
  98. Michotte A (1963). The perception of causality (trans: Miles T, Miles E). Basic Books, New York. (Original work published 1946)Google Scholar
  99. Michotte A, Thinès G (1991) Perceived causality. In: Thinès G, Costall A, Butterworth G (eds) Michotte’s experimental phenomenology of perception. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 66–87 (Original work published 1963)Google Scholar
  100. Michotte A, Thinès G, Crabbé G (1964) Les compléments amodaux des structures perceptives [Amodal completions of perceptual structures]. Publications Universitaires, Studia Psychologica, LouvainGoogle Scholar
  101. Morris MW, Peng K (1994) Culture and cause: American and Chinese attributions for social and physical events. J Pers Soc Psychol 67:949–971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Morris MW, Nisbett RE, Peng K (1995) Causal attribution across domains and cultures. In: Sperber D, Premack D, Premack AJ (eds) Causal cognition: a multidisciplinary debate. Clarendon, Oxford, pp 577–612Google Scholar
  103. Morris JP, Pelphrey KA, McCarthy G (2008) Perceived causality influences brain activity evoked by biological motion. Soc Neurosci 3:16–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Nakamura K (1996) The effect of manual operation of a moving target on young children’s perception of causality. Jpn J Dev Psychol 7:119–127Google Scholar
  105. Nakamura K (2006) The perception of causality as a kinetic property by young children. Jpn J Psychon Sci 25:35–40Google Scholar
  106. Natsoulas T (1961) Principles of momentum and kinetic energy in the perception of causality. Am J Psychol 74:394–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Newman GE, Choi H, Wynn K, Scholl BJ (2008) The origins of causal perception: evidence from postdictive processing in infancy. Cogn Psychol 57:262–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. O’Connell S, Dunbar RIM (2005) The perception of causality in chimpanzees (Pan spp.). Anim Cogn 8:60–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Oakes LM (1994) Development of infants’ use of continuity cues in their perception of causality. Dev Psychol 30:869–879CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Oakes LM, Cohen LB (1990) Infant perception of a causal event. Cogn Dev 5:193–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Overgaard M, Gallagher S, Ramsøy TZ (2008) An integration of first-person methodologies in cognitive science. J Conscious Stud 15:100–120Google Scholar
  112. Palmer S, Rock I (1994) Rethinking perceptual organization: the role of uniform connectedness. Psychon Bull Rev 1:29–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Pavlova M, Guerreschi M, Lutzenberger W, Krägeloh-Mann I (2010) Social interaction revealed by motion: dynamics of neuromagnetic gamma activity. Cereb Cortex 20:2361–2367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Peng K, Knowles ED (2003) Culture, education, and the attribution of physical causality. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 29:1272–1284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Pollick FE, Kay JW, Heim K, Stringer R (2005) Gender recognition from point-light walkers. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 31:1247–1265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Powesland PF (1959) The effect of practice upon the perception of causality. Can J Psychol 13:155–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Rakison DH (2005) A secret agent? How infants learn about the identity of objects in a causal scene. J Exp Child Psychol 91:271–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Rakison DH, Krogh L (2012) Does causal action facilitate causal perception in infants younger than 6 months of age? Dev Sci 15:43–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Rakison DH, Poulin-Dubois D (2001) Development origin of the animate-inanimate distinction. Psychol Bull 127:209–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Rauschenberger R, Peterson MA, Mosca F, Bruno N (2004) Amodal completion in visual search. Preemption or context effects? Psychol Sci 15:351–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Rimé B, Boulanger B, Laubin P, Richir M, Stroobants K (1985) The perception of interpersonal emotions originated by patterns of movement. Motiv Emot 9:241–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Rochat P, Morgan R, Carpenter M (1997) Young infants’ sensitivity to movement information specifying social causality. Cogn Dev 12:537–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Roediger HL (1996) Memory illusions. J Mem Lang 35:76–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Roser ME, Fugelsang JA, Dunbar KN, Corballis PM, Gazzaniga MS (2005) Dissociating processes supporting causal perception and causal inference in the brain. Neuropsychology 19:591–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Runeson S, Frykholm G (1981) Visual perception of lifted weight. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 7:733–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Saxe R, Carey S (2006) The perception of causality in infancy. Acta Psychol 123:144–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Schlottmann A (1999) Seeing it happen and knowing how it works: how children understand the relationship between perceptual causality and underlying mechanism. Dev Psychol 35:303–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Schlottmann A (2000) Is perception of causality modular? Trends Cogn Sci 4:441–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Schlottmann A, Anderson NH (1993) An information integration approach to phenomenal causality. Mem Cogn 21:785–801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Schlottmann A, Ray E (2010) Goal attribution to schematic animals: do 6-month-olds perceive biological motion as animate? Dev Sci 13:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Schlottmann A, Shanks DR (1992) Evidence for a distinction between judged and perceived causality. Quart J Exp Psychol 44A:321–342Google Scholar
  132. Schlottmann A, Surian L (1999) Do 9-month-olds perceive causation-at-a-distance? Perception 28:1105–1113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Schlottmann A, Allen D, Linderoth C, Hesketh S (2002) Perceptual causality in children. Child Dev 73:1656–1677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Schlottmann A, Ray ED, Mitchell A, Demetriou N (2006) Perceived social and physical causality in animated motion: spontaneous reports and ratings. Acta Psychol 123:112–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Schlottmann A, Surian L, Ray ED (2009) Causal perception of action-and-reaction sequences in 8- to 10-month-olds. J Exp Child Psychol 103:87–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Schlottmann A, Ray ED, Surian L (2012) Emerging perception of causality in action-and-reaction sequences from 4 to 6 months of age: is it domain-specific? J Exp Child Psychol 112:208–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Scholl BJ, Nakayama K (2002) Causal capture: contextual effects on the perception of collision events. Psychol Sci 13:493–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Scholl BJ, Nakayama K (2004) Illusory causal crescents: misperceived spatial relations due to perceived causality. Perception 33:455–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Scholl BJ, Tremoulet PD (2000) Perceptual causality and animacy. Trends Cogn Sci 4:299–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Spelke ES, Phillips A, Woodward AL (1995) Infants’ knowledge of object motion and human action. In: Sperber D, Premack D, Premack A (eds) Causal cognition; a multidisciplinary debate. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 44–78Google Scholar
  141. Springer K, Meier JA, Berry DS (1996) Nonverbal bases of social perception: developmental change in sensitivity to patterns of motion that reveal interpersonal events. J Nonverbal Behav 20:199–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Stagg CJ, Nitsche MA (2011) Physiological basis of transcranial direct current stimulation. Neuroscientist 17:37–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Straube B, Wolk D, Chatterjee A (2011) The role of the right parietal lobe in the perception of causality: a tDCS study. Exp Brain Res 215:315–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Talmy L (1988) Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cogn Sci 12:49–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Taylor SE, Fiske ST (1975) Point-of-view and perceptions of causality. J Pers Soc Psychol 32:439–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. Thommen E, Dumas A, Erskine J, Reymond J (1998) Perception and conceptualization of intentionality in children. Br J Dev Psychol 16:255–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Tremoulet PD, Feldman J (2000) Perception of animacy from the motion of a single object. Perception 29:943–951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Tschacher W, Kupper Z (2006) Perception of causality in schizophrenia spectrum disorder. Schizophr Bull 32:S106–S112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Varela FJ (1996) Neurophenomenology: a methodological remedy for the hard problem. J Consciousness Stud 3:330–350Google Scholar
  150. Wagemans J, van Lier R, Scholl BJ (2006) Introduction to Michotte’s heritage in perception and cognition research. Acta Psychol 123:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Weir S (1978) The perception of motion: Michotte revisited. Perception 7:247–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. White PA (1990) Ideas about causation in philosophy and psychology. Psychol Bull 108:3–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. White PA (1999) Toward a causal realist account of causal understanding. Am J Psychol 112:605–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. White PA (2005) Visual causal impression in the perception of several moving objects. Vis Cogn 12:395–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. White PA (2006a) The causal asymmetry. Psychol Rev 113:132–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. White PA (2006b) The role of activity in visual impressions of causality. Acta Psychol 123:166–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. White PA (2007) Impressions of force in visual perception of collision events: a test of the causal asymmetry hypothesis. Psychon Bull Rev 14:647–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. White PA (2009a) Perception of forces exerted by objects in collision events. Psychol Rev 116:580–601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. White PA (2009b) Property transmission: an explanatory account of the role of similarity information in causal inference. Psychol Bull 135:774–793CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. White PA (2011a) Judgments about forces in described interaction between objects. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 37:979–993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. White PA (2011b) Visual impression of forces between objects: entraining, enforced disintegration, and shattering. Vis Cogn 19:635–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. White PA (2011c) Visual impressions of force exerted by one object on another when the objects do not come into contact. Vis Cogn 19:340–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. White PA (2012a) 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. Psychol Bull 138:589–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. White PA (2012b) Perceptual impressions and mental simulations of force: reply to Hubbard (2012). Psychol Bull 138:624–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. White PA, Milne A (1997) Phenomenal causality: impressions of pulling in the visual perception of objects in motion. Am J Psychol 110:573–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. Wilson M (2002) Six views of embodied cognition. Psychon Bull Rev 9:625–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. Wolff P (2007) Representing causation. J Exp Psychol Gen 136:82–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  168. Wolff P (2008) Dynamics and the perception of causal events. In: Shipley T, Zacks J (eds) Understanding events: how humans see, represent, and act on events. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 555–587Google Scholar
  169. Yela M (1952) Phenomenal causation at a distance. Quart J Exp Psychol 4:139–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. Young ME (1995) On the origin of personal causal theories. Psychon Bull Rev 2:83–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. Young ME, Falmier O (2008) Launching at a distance: the effect of spatial markers. Quart J Exp Psychol 61:1356–1370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. Young ME, Sutherland S (2009) The spatiotemporal distinctiveness of direct causation. Psychon Bull Rev 16:729–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  173. Young ME, Rogers ET, Beckmann JS (2005) Causal impression: predicting when, not just whether. Mem Cogn 33:320–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. Young ME, Beckmann JS, Wasserman EA (2006) Pigeons’ discrimination of Michotte’s launching effect. J Exp Anal Behav 86:223–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  175. Zhou J, Huang X, Jin X, Liang J, Shui R, Shen M (in press) Perceived causalities of physical events are influenced by social cues. J Exp Psychol Hum Perc PerformGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyTexas Christian UniversityFort WorthUSA

Personalised recommendations