{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017341040462427744, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.095070422535211, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Spatial and foveal biases, not perceived mass or heaviness, explain the effect of target size on representational momentum and representational gravity.

The spatial memory for the last position occupied by a moving target is usually displaced forward in the direction of motion. Interpreted as a mental analogue of physical momentum, this phenomenon was coined representational momentum (RM). As momentum is given by the product of an object's velocity and mass, both these factors came to be under scrutiny in RM studies, the goal being to provide support for the internalization hypothesis. Although velocity was found to determine RM's magnitude, possible effects of mass were more elusive. Recently, an effect of target size on RM was reported, adding to previous findings that bigger targets were more mislocalized downward in the direction of gravity (via perceived heaviness and representational gravity; RG). The aim in the present research was to test that those outcomes reflect an internalization of momentum by excluding oculomotor factors. The results showed that an effect of target size, when it emerged, could be accounted for by a foveal bias such that bigger targets were more displaced toward gaze than were smaller ones. Specific contingencies between eye movements and target size seem to account for previous reports regarding the alleged effects of perceived mass on both RM and RG. This phenomenon seems furthermore to be modulated by the presence of other visual elements (fixation point) and the range of target velocities. These outcomes are taken as a rebuttal to the claim that cognitive analogues of mass or heaviness are responsible for previously reported effects of target size on both RM and RG.