Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

Real magic: future studies of magic should be grounded in neuroscience

Nature Reviews Neuroscience volume 10, page 241 (2009)Cite this article

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

We recently proposed, in collaboration with five professional magicians, that neuroscientists and magicians should join forces in the study of human perception and cognition (Attention and awareness in stage magic: turning tricks into research. Nature Rev. Neurosci. 9, 871–879 (2008))1. Our two-pronged approach was that, first, magic techniques could be used as powerful tools in cognitive neuroscience research, and that, second, the perception of magic tricks will be best understood from a neurobiological perspective.

While commending our Perspective, Lamont and Henderson (Nature Rev. Neurosci. 29 Jan 2009 (doi: 10.1038/nrn2473-c1))2 point out that scientific interest in magic is not new, and that previous attempts to establish a theory of magic have failed. They also mention that Lamont and Wiseman's classification of conjuring effects3 — adopted in our Perspective — did not merely list the main categories, but also indicated the methods behind the tricks. Finally, they refer to Simons and Chabris' classic study of inattentional blindness4, and propose that observers that look directly at the gorilla will not fail to notice it. We address these points below.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Macknik, S. L. et al. Attention and awareness in stage magic: turning tricks into research. Nature Rev. Neurosci. 9, 871–879 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lamont, P. & Henderson, J. M. More attention and greater awareness in the scientific study of magic. Nature Rev. Neurosci. 29 Jan 2009 (doi:10.1038/nrn2473-c1).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lamont, P. & Wiseman, R. Magic in theory (Hermetic, Seattle, Washington, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Simons, D. J. & Chabris, C. F. Gorillas in our midst: sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception 28, 1059–1074 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Gregory, R. L. Conjuring. Perception 11, 631–633 (1982).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Trinkaus, N. Preconditioning an audience for mental magic. Percept. Mot. Skills 51, 262 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Jastrow, J. Psychological notes upon sleight-of-hand experts. Science 3, 685–689 (1896).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kuhn, G. & Tatler, B. W. Magic and fixation: now you don't see it, now you do. Perception 34, 1155–1161 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Martinez-Conde, S. & Macknik, S. L. Magic and the brain. Sci. Am. 299, 72–79 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Martinez-Conde, S. & Macknik, S. L. Mind tricks. Nature 448, 414 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Memmert, D. The effects of eye movements, age, and expertise on inattentional blindness. Conscious. Cogn. 15, 620–627 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. O'Regan, J. K., Deubel, H., Clark, J. J. & Rensink, R. A. Picture changes during blinks: looking without seeing and seeing without looking. Vis. Cogn. 7, 191–211 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Stephen. L. Macknik and Susana Martinez-Conde are at the Barrow Neurological Institute, 350 West Thomas Road, Phoenix, Arizona 85013, USA.,

    Stephen L. Macknik & Susana Martinez-Conde

Authors
  1. Stephen L. Macknik
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Susana Martinez-Conde
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susana Martinez-Conde.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Macknik, S., Martinez-Conde, S. Real magic: future studies of magic should be grounded in neuroscience. Nat Rev Neurosci 10, 241 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2473-c2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2473-c2

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing