Reconciling intuitive physics and Newtonian mechanics for colliding objects.

People have strong intuitions about the influence objects exert upon one another when they collide. Because people's judgments appear to deviate from Newtonian mechanics, psychologists have suggested that people depend on a variety of task-specific heuristics. This leaves open the question of how these heuristics could be chosen, and how to integrate them into a unified model that can explain human judgments across a wide range of physical reasoning tasks. We propose an alternative framework, in which people's judgments are based on optimal statistical inference over a Newtonian physical model that incorporates sensory noise and intrinsic uncertainty about the physical properties of the objects being viewed. This noisy Newton framework can be applied to a multitude of judgments, with people's answers determined by the uncertainty they have for physical variables and the constraints of Newtonian mechanics. We investigate a range of effects in mass judgments that have been taken as strong evidence for heuristic use and show that they are well explained by the interplay between Newtonian constraints and sensory uncertainty. We also consider an extended model that handles causality judgments, and obtain good quantitative agreement with human judgments across tasks that involve different judgment types with a single consistent set of parameters.

[1]  A. Rose,et al.  The Relative Sensitivities of Television Pickup Tubes, Photographic Film, and the Human Eye , 1942, Proceedings of the IRE.

[2]  H. Vries The quantum character of light and its bearing upon threshold of vision, the differential sensitivity and visual acuity of the eye , 1943 .

[3]  F. Heider,et al.  An experimental study of apparent behavior , 1944 .

[4]  W. E. Hick The Threshold for Sudden Changes in the Velocity of a Seen Object , 1950, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[5]  J. Knott The organization of behavior: A neuropsychological theory , 1951 .

[6]  W. W. Peterson,et al.  The theory of signal detectability , 1954, Trans. IRE Prof. Group Inf. Theory.

[7]  J. M. Notterman,et al.  Weber's Law and the Difference Threshold for the Velocity of a Seen Object , 1957, Science.

[8]  A. Gemelli,et al.  The influence of the subject's attitude in perception , 1958 .

[9]  H. Laborit,et al.  [Experimental study]. , 1958, Bulletin mensuel - Societe de medecine militaire francaise.

[10]  G. Ekman Weber's Law and Related Functions , 1959 .

[11]  T. Natsoulas Judgments of velocity and weight in a casual situation. , 1960, The American journal of psychology.

[12]  W. Goldsmith,et al.  Impact: the theory and physical behaviour of colliding solids. , 1960 .

[13]  D. Boyle A Contribution to the Study of Phenomenal Causation* , 1960 .

[14]  T. Natsoulas Principles of momentum and kinetic energy in the perception of causality. , 1961, The American journal of psychology.

[15]  R. C. Oldfield THE PERCEPTION OF CAUSALITY , 1963 .

[16]  H. M. Jenkins,et al.  JUDGMENT OF CONTINGENCY BETWEEN RESPONSES AND OUTCOMES. , 1965, Psychological monographs.

[17]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[18]  R. Rescorla Probability of shock in the presence and absence of CS in fear conditioning. , 1968, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[19]  N. Beasley The extent of individual differences in the perception of causality. , 1968, Canadian journal of psychology.

[20]  Beasley Na The extent of individual differences in the perception of causality. , 1968 .

[21]  H. Akaike,et al.  Information Theory and an Extension of the Maximum Likelihood Principle , 1973 .

[22]  B. Shanon Aristotelianism, Newtonianism and the Physics of the Layman , 1976, Perception.

[23]  D. P. Andrews,et al.  Acuity for spatial separation as a function of stimulus size , 1978, Vision Research.

[24]  Hirotugu Akaike,et al.  On the Likelihood of a Time Series Model , 1978 .

[25]  S. Weir The Perception of Motion: Michotte Revisited , 1978 .

[26]  A. Caramazza,et al.  Curvilinear motion in the absence of external forces: naive beliefs about the motion of objects. , 1980, Science.

[27]  Andrea A. diSessa,et al.  Unlearning Aristotelian Physics: A Study of Knowledge-Based Learning , 1982, Cogn. Sci..

[28]  J T Todd,et al.  Visual Perception of Relative Mass in Dynamic Events , 1982, Perception.

[29]  S. Runeson On visual perception of dynamic events , 1983 .

[30]  H. Barlow Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information: David Marr. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1982. pp. xvi + 397 , 1983 .

[31]  M. McCloskey,et al.  Intuitive physics: the straight-down belief and its origin. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[32]  R. Shepard Ecological constraints on internal representation: resonant kinematics of perceiving, imagining, thinking, and dreaming. , 1984, Psychological review.

[33]  G. Miller,et al.  The Cognitive Sciences , 1984 .

[34]  A. Leslie Spatiotemporal Continuity and the Perception of Causality in Infants , 1984, Perception.

[35]  R. Shepard Ecological constraints on internal representation: resonant kinematics of perceiving, imagining, thinking, and dreaming. , 1984, Psychological review.

[36]  D. Proffitt,et al.  Judgments of natural and anomalous trajectories in the presence and absence of motion. , 1985, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[37]  E. Spelke,et al.  Object perception and object-directed reaching in infancy. , 1985, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[38]  R. Nosofsky Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[39]  J. Jonides,et al.  Intuitive reasoning about abstract and familiar physics problems , 1986, Memory & cognition.

[40]  R. Shepard,et al.  Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science. , 1987, Science.

[41]  A. Leslie,et al.  Do six-month-old infants perceive causality? , 1987, Cognition.

[42]  W H Warren,et al.  The Way the Ball Bounces: Visual and Auditory Perception of Elasticity and Control of the Bounce Pass , 1987, Perception.

[43]  Johanna D. Moore,et al.  The Tenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society , 1988 .

[44]  Leonard Talmy,et al.  Force Dynamics in Language and Cognition , 1987, Cogn. Sci..

[45]  Paul Thagard,et al.  Explanatory Coherence and Belief Revision in Naive Physics , 1988 .

[46]  P. White Causal Processing: Origins and Development , 1988 .

[47]  D. Proffitt,et al.  Understanding natural dynamics. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[48]  W. Geisler Sequential ideal-observer analysis of visual discriminations. , 1989, Psychological review.

[49]  D R Proffitt,et al.  Understanding collision dynamics. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[50]  John R. Anderson The Adaptive Character of Thought , 1990 .

[51]  John R. Anderson,et al.  The Adaptive Nature of Human Categorization , 1991 .

[52]  D. Gilden On the origins of dynamical awareness. , 1991, Psychological review.

[53]  H. Hecht,et al.  Influence of animation on dynamical judgments. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[54]  D. Shanks,et al.  Evidence for a Distinction between Judged and Perceived Causality , 1992, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[55]  S. Runeson,et al.  The indispensability of precollision kinematics in the visual perception of relative mass , 1993, Perception & psychophysics.

[56]  L. Cohen,et al.  How infants perceive a simple causal event , 1993 .

[57]  N. Anderson,et al.  An information integration approach to phenomenal causality , 1993, Memory & cognition.

[58]  S. Lea,et al.  Visual Perception of Intentional Motion , 1994, Perception.

[59]  D. Proffitt,et al.  Heuristic judgment of mass ratio in two-body collisions , 1994, Perception & psychophysics.

[60]  S. Flynn The Perception of Relative Mass in Physical Collisions , 1994 .

[61]  S. Runeson Support for the cue-heuristic model is based on suboptimal observer performance: Response to Gilden and Proffitt (1994) , 1995, Perception & psychophysics.

[62]  R. Sekuler,et al.  Sound alters visual motion perception , 1997, Nature.

[63]  P. Cheng From covariation to causation: A causal power theory. , 1997 .

[64]  P. White,et al.  Phenomenal causality: impressions of pulling in the visual perception of objects in motion. , 1997, The American journal of psychology.

[65]  L. Cohen,et al.  Precursors to infants' perception of the causality of a simple event , 1998 .

[66]  Nir Vulkan An Economist's Perspective on Probability Matching , 2000 .

[67]  P. Juslin,et al.  Visual perception of dynamic properties: cue heuristics versus direct-perceptual competence. , 2000, Psychological review.

[68]  Patrice D. Tremoulet,et al.  Perceptual causality and animacy , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[69]  Patrice D. Tremoulet,et al.  Perception of Animacy from the Motion of a Single Object , 2000, Perception.

[70]  D. M. Jacobs,et al.  Learning to perceive the relative mass of colliding balls: The effects of ratio scaling and feedback , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[71]  S. Shimojo,et al.  When Sound Affects Vision: Effects of Auditory Grouping on Visual Motion Perception , 2001, Psychological science.

[72]  M. Hegarty,et al.  Impetus beliefs as default heuristics: Dissociation between explicit and implicit knowledge about motion , 2001, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[73]  Steve Rothberg,et al.  Measurement of contact time in short duration sports ball impacts: an experimental method and correlation with the perceptions of elite golfers , 2001 .

[74]  Jeffrey S. Perry,et al.  Edge co-occurrence in natural images predicts contour grouping performance , 2001, Vision Research.

[75]  F. Lacquaniti,et al.  Does the brain model Newton's laws? , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[76]  D. M. Jacobs,et al.  Learning to visually perceive the relative mass of colliding balls in globally and locally constrained task ecologies. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[77]  Refractor Vision , 2000, The Lancet.

[78]  Cara H. Cashon,et al.  A constructivist model of infant cognition , 2002 .

[79]  T. Hubbard,et al.  A possible role of naïve impetus in Michotte's "launching effect": Evidence from representational momentum , 2002 .

[80]  Edward H. Adelson,et al.  Motion illusions as optimal percepts , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[81]  K. Nakayama,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article CAUSAL CAPTURE: Contextual Effects on the Perception of Collision Events , 2022 .

[82]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Model selection and multimodel inference : a practical information-theoretic approach , 2003 .

[83]  N. Troje,et al.  Audiovisual phenomenal causality , 2003, Perception & psychophysics.

[84]  M. Peruggia Model Selection and Multimodel Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach (2nd ed.) , 2003 .

[85]  Koen Lamberts,et al.  An Exemplar Model For Perceptual Categorization Of Events , 2003 .

[86]  E. Wagenmakers,et al.  AIC model selection using Akaike weights , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[87]  A. Yuille,et al.  Object perception as Bayesian inference. , 2004, Annual review of psychology.

[88]  B. Scholl,et al.  Effects of grouping and attention on the perception of causality , 2004, Perception & psychophysics.

[89]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Illusory Causal Crescents: Misperceived Spatial Relations Due to Perceived Causality , 2004, Perception.

[90]  Wilson S. Geisler,et al.  Optimal eye movement strategies in visual search , 2005, Nature.

[91]  Alan A. Stocker,et al.  Sensory Adaptation within a Bayesian Framework for Perception , 2005, NIPS.

[92]  S. Carey,et al.  The perception of causality in infancy. , 2006, Acta psychologica.

[93]  Clara Casco,et al.  The psychophysical law of speed estimation in Michotte’s causal events , 2006, Vision Research.

[94]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Noise characteristics and prior expectations in human visual speed perception , 2006, Nature Neuroscience.

[95]  A. Cohen Contributions of invariants, heuristics, and exemplars to the visual perception of relative mass. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[96]  A. Yuille,et al.  Opinion TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences Vol.10 No.7 July 2006 Special Issue: Probabilistic models of cognition Vision as Bayesian inference: analysis by synthesis? , 2022 .

[97]  P. White The causal asymmetry. , 2006, Psychological review.

[98]  M. V. Velzen,et al.  Self-organizing maps , 2007 .

[99]  M. Kenward,et al.  An Introduction to the Bootstrap , 2007 .

[100]  G. V. van Orden,et al.  The emergent coordination of cognitive function. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[101]  F. Lacquaniti,et al.  Visuo-motor coordination and internal models for object interception , 2009, Experimental Brain Research.

[102]  S. Runeson,et al.  Realism of Confidence, Modes of Apprehension, and Variable-Use in Visual Discrimination of Relative Mass , 2008 .

[103]  Kenneth D. Forbus,et al.  Learning Naïve Physics Models and Misconceptions , 2009 .

[104]  P. Dayan,et al.  Perceptual organization in the tilt illusion. , 2009, Journal of vision.

[105]  Vikash K. Mansinghka,et al.  A Bayesian framework for modeling intuitive dynamics , 2009 .

[106]  P. White Perception of forces exerted by objects in collision events. , 2009, Psychological review.

[107]  A. Cohen,et al.  Exploring mass perception with Markov chain Monte Carlo. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[108]  Joshua B Tenenbaum,et al.  Theory-based causal induction. , 2009, Psychological review.

[109]  Kenneth D. Forbus,et al.  Learning Naïve Physics Models by Analogical Generalization , 2009 .

[110]  Adam N Sanborn,et al.  Exemplar models as a mechanism for performing Bayesian inference , 2010, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[111]  William H Warren,et al.  Passive vs. active control of rhythmic ball bouncing: the role of visual information. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[112]  A. Chatterjee,et al.  Space and Time in Perceptual Causality , 2010, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[113]  Adam N Sanborn,et al.  Rational approximations to rational models: alternative algorithms for category learning. , 2010, Psychological review.

[114]  J. Bennett,et al.  Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding , 2010 .

[115]  Jessica B. Hamrick Internal physics models guide probabilistic judgments about object dynamics , 2011 .

[116]  E. Brenner,et al.  Misjudging where you felt a light switch in a dark room , 2011, Experimental Brain Research.

[117]  Jonathan I. Flombaum,et al.  Amodal Causal Capture in the Tunnel Effect , 2011, Perception.

[118]  J. Degrieck,et al.  Finite element modelling and experimental study of oblique soccer ball bounce , 2011, Journal of sports sciences.

[119]  L. Rips Causation From Perception , 2011, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[120]  Joshua B. Tenenbaum,et al.  Noisy Newtons: Unifying process and dependency accounts of causal attribution , 2012, CogSci.

[121]  Kevin A. Smith,et al.  Sources of uncertainty in intuitive physics , 2012, CogSci.