A recent study concluded that audience members who have seen magic that uses a pseudo scientific explanations were more likely to believe or give weight to pseudo sciences claims (specifically in psychology) after the show. The study used Darren Brown as an example because in his show he says that he will be performing tricks but states he uses psychological principles as his methods. While that is true to some degree it is to a much lesser degree than the audience realizes. Here is a link to the original study as well as a writers take on it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6258475/ https://theness.com/neurologicablog...m9W_C6cfOJI_i0CTSYMAOEi0uoxDVpsmC64zS67FpEGvE As a skeptic I am of the mind that magicians bear the onus to address negative outcomes like those in the study to a reasonable extent. I imagine that is where the people may disagree in what are reasonable actions one would take. Like does Darren make a reasonable effort to combat this bad outcome? According to the study his actions fall short, whether by intent to leave them wondering or not is irrelevant because the outcome is still the same. How much of a show similar to his can be sacrificed to address this negative outcome? Does this idea effect your performances? This doesn't affect me so much though because I make no claims of specialized skills but armed with the knowledge of how children of younger ages perceive magic I will be more careful how I perform for those younger age groups. This idea for me isn't totally fleshed out yet as evidence from the slap dash writing but I am hoping to delve into this a bit more. All thoughts on this subject are welcome.