The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Naive Theories of Motion
Abstract
In this chapter we describe research aimed at determining what sorts of knowledge are in fact acquired through experience with moving objects. We first present some basic findings from experiments in which subjects solved simple problems concerning objects in motion. We then show that these and other findings imply that people develop on the basis of their everyday experience remarkably well-articulated naive theories of motion. Further, we argue that the assumptions of the naive theories are quite consistent across individuals. In fact, the theories developed by different individuals are best described as different forms of the same basic theory. Although this basic theory appears to be a reasonable outcome of experience with real-world motion, it is strikingly incon sistent with the fundamental principles of classical physics. In fact, the naive theory is remarkably similar to a pre-Newtonian physical theory popular in the 14th through 16th centuries.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Barsalou, L. W. (1999) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x99002149 · Cited by 6,887
Quantifying Qualitative Analyses of Verbal Data: A Practical Guide
Chi, M. T. H. (1997) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0603_1 · Cited by 1,764
Where's the evidence that active learning works?
Michael, J. (2006) · Advances in Physiology Education · doi:10.1152/advan.00053.2006 · Cited by 1,648
Kozma, R. B. (1991) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543061002179 · Cited by 1,429
Organizational routines are stored as procedural memory: Evidence from a laboratory study
Cohen, M. D., & Bacdayan, P. (1994) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.5.4.554 · Cited by 1,393
Metadata
- Venue
- Mental Models
- Publisher
- Psychology Press
- Published
- 2014-01-14
- Pages
- 307-332
- OpenAlex
- W2100895909
- Cited by
- 595
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 82.78
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Naive Theories of Motion. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4324/9781315802725-17
- The paper
- Naive Theories of Motion. (2014). Mental Models. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315802725-17
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.