The Trick That Tricks You Too: Why “Name Any Card” Might Be Less Fooling Than You Think

It’s the magician’s dream: no force, no cues, no hesitation — just a spectator naming any card their heart desires. It sounds like the purest form of free will. A moment so fair, so open, that it defies explanation.

But beneath the surface of that perfect moment, something strange is happening.

Because when researchers put this exact scenario to the test, they discovered a twist no magician saw coming: spectators may not feel as free — or as fooled — as you think.

That’s the unsettling conclusion of a new scientific study by The  Magic Lab published in the Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts.

And if you’re a magician who swears by the power of the “named card” reveal, you might want to read this before your next show.

Magicians vs. Muggles: The freedom illusion

For years, magicians have been convinced of one thing: verbal choices feel freer. When you let a spectator name a card, it seems like a more open and impossible decision than having them physically pick one.

And you wouldn’t be alone in thinking that. In the study, 201 magicians were surveyed about what feels like a “free choice.” Across the board, they ranked naming a card as more free than selecting one physically.

But here's the thing, when laypeople were asked the same question, they didn’t agree.

Previous research (and an independent experiment by The Jerx) revealed that non-magicians felt more freedom when physically choosing a card from a deck than when naming one aloud. Counterintuitive? Definitely. But this new study took things a step further: it tested how this difference impacts the actual experience of a magic trick.

The experiment:

To investigate, Radeck Wincza and Gustav Kuhn took a classic tool — the Invisible Deck — and ran a carefully designed experiment in real-world settings: cafés, parks, casual environments where real magic happens.

Participants (totaling 134 spectators) were randomly assigned to one of two versions:

1. The Name Condition – A participant named a card, which was then revealed as the only reversed card in the deck.

2. The Pick Condition – A participant physically chose a face-down card from a spread, and it was the only reversed one.

After watching the trick, participants rated:

• How free their choice felt

• How much they thought the magician influenced it

• How “impossible” the effect felt

• Their emotional responses (surprise, enjoyment, etc.)

The results: A plot twist for performers

What did they find?

 Perceived Freedom: Participants felt significantly more free when physically picking a card than when naming one.

 Magician Influence: They believed the magician had more control over the named choice than the picked one.

 Strength of the Trick: Most surprising of all — the pick condition was rated as more impossible than the name condition.

Surprise and enjoyment ratings? Roughly the same. But the impact — the feeling of an impossible moment — was stronger when a physical choice was involved.

The very structure many magicians assume feels “freest” might actually come across as more controlled and less impressive.

Figure 1. Ratings of Magicians’ Influence and Freedom of SelectionNote. Mean influence (left panel) and freedom ratings (right panel) as a function of how participants selected the card and whether the card was selected by themselves or another person in the group. Error bars denote the standard error of the means.

How can this be?

Psychologists have long known that our sense of agency — our feeling of being in control — relies on matching our intention with a visible action. When you think of a card, there’s no physical cue to anchor that decision. That means it also leaves space for doubt.

Your spectator might wonder: Did I really choose that card… or was I somehow influenced? Magicians are already viewed as mind-readers or psychological manipulators, so even a completely free verbal choice might not feel free.

In contrast, physically picking a card is an external, observable action. The brain tags it as “mine.” It feels real and deliberate. Which makes the result — the card reveal — all the more impossible.

Takeaways for magicians: Rethinking free choice

So what does all this mean for your repertoire?

It’s easy to fall in love with a method — especially one that feels elegant and deceptive from the performer’s point of view. The Invisible Deck is a masterpiece of simplicity. Having a spectator name any card feels so open, so clean, so fair.

But science has just reminded us: what feels fair to you may not feel free to them.

If you care about creating moments of deep astonishment — the kind that linger and grow in memory, you’ll want to consider how your spectators experience their choices, not just how you engineer them.

Here’s how to apply that insight:

Reconsider “Name Any Card” moments:

That casual, offhand verbal choice? It might be read by your audience as suspiciously open — a blank canvas for potential influence. Use it intentionally, not automatically. Ask yourself: Does this framing actually help, or could it quietly backfire?

Use physical action to reinforce agency:

When a spectator physically selects a card — reaches for it, touches it, holds it — they feel more ownership of the choice. The decision becomes embodied, and that enhances their feeling of agency. And the stronger their sense of agency, the stronger the effect will feel.

This is particularly important if you're building toward an impossible outcome. The cleaner and more self-directed the choice seems, the more impossible the result will feel — but only if they truly believe the choice was theirs.

 If you use verbal choices, externalize them:

Sometimes you need a verbal selection. That’s fine. But consider ways to make the choice visible and concrete. For instance:

• Have the spectator write down the card on paper.

• Ask them to visualize placing it into an imaginary deck.

• Use a prop that captures the choice physically (e.g., a labeled envelope, a card box).

  
  

These small additions might help anchor the choice in reality, bridging the gap between thought and action, and restoring the feeling of control.

Respect spectator psychology

Remember: spectators aren’t just reacting to method. They’re constantly — often unconsciously — assessing how much influence you might have had. If something feels too perfect, they’ll look for cracks. And if a choice happens entirely in the mind, it may feel like one of those cracks, even if the method was completely clean.

Your job isn’t just to hide the method but to design the experience in a way that feels fair and impossible.

Let go of intuition. Trust experience.

The greatest misdirection in magic might be our own instincts.

This study reminds us that what “works” is often based on tradition, gut feeling, or magician folklore — not evidence. Try both versions of a trick. Observe your audience, gather feedback. And let the effect — not the method — be your guide.

At the end of the day, this isn’t just about card tricks. It’s about something deeper: the art of crafting real choice in an experience that isn’t real at all. And the more convincingly you can give that sense of freedom…The more your magic will feel like a miracle.

From Lab to Stage: The new frontier of magic

This study is part of a growing movement to bring experimental psychology into the magician’s toolkit, not to demystify magic, but to deepen it, to refine what works and understand why certain effects hit harder and others fall flat.

If you’re a magician who cares about the experience of astonishment and not just the method, this kind of research should be beneficial.

Want to read the full study?

Wincza, R., & Kuhn, G. (2025). Challenging Magicians’ Intuitive Insights: The Role of Audience Participation in Experiencing a Magic Trick. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. APA Link