Extending the seductive allure of neuroscience explanations effect to popular articles about educational topics

British Journal of Educational Psychology

Volumn 87, Issue 4, 2017, Pages 518-534

  Im, Soo Hyun ^a   Varma, Keisha ^a   Varma, Sashank ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Amazon Mechanical Turk; educational neuroscience; individual differences; scientific reasoning; seductive allure of neuroscience explanations

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; EDUCATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEUROSCIENCE; PSYCHOLOGY; THINKING; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; AGED; EDUCATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEUROSCIENCES; PSYCHOLOGY; THINKING; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 85019947971     PISSN: 00070998     EISSN: 20448279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/bjep.12162     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Ariely, D., & Berns, G. S. (2010). Neuromarketing: The hope and hype of neuroimaging in business. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11, 284–292. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2795
2. Baker, D. A., Ware, J. M., Schweitzer, N. J., & Risko, E. F. (2017). Making sense of research on the neuroimage bias. Public Understanding of Science, 26, 251–258 https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662515604975
3. Bowers, J. S. (2016). The practical and principled problems with educational neuroscience. Psychological Review, 123, 600–612. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000025
4. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.) (2000). How people learn. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
5. Bruer, J. T. (1997). Education and the brain: A bridge too far. Educational Researcher, 26, 4–16. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X026008004
6. Butterworth, B., Varma, S., & Laurillard, D. (2011). Dyscalculia: From brain to education. Science, 332, 1049–1053. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1201536
7. Button, K. S., Ioannidis, J. P., Mokrysz, C., Nosek, B. A., Flint, J., Robinson, E. S., & Munafò, M. R. (2013). Power failure: Why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14, 365–376. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3475
8. Casler, K., Bickel, L., & Hackett, E. (2013). Separate but equal? A comparison of participants and data gathered via Amazon's MTurk, social media, and face-to-face behavioral testing. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 2156–2160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.05.009
9. Chandler, J., Mueller, P., & Paolacci, G. (2014). Nonnaïveté among Amazon Mechanical Turk workers: Consequences and solutions for behavioral researchers. Behavior Research Methods, 46, 112–130. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0365-7
10. Dalgleish, T. (2004). The emotional brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5, 583–589. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1432
11. Eklund, A., Nichols, T. E., & Knutson, H. (2016). Cluster failure: Why fMRI inferences for spatial extent have inflated false-positive results. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 113, 7900–7905. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1602413113
12. Fernandez-Duque, D., Evans, J., Christian, C., & Hodges, S. D. (2015). Superfluous neuroscience information makes explanations of psychological phenomena more appealing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 27, 926–944. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00750
13. Gabrieli, J. D. (2009). Dyslexia: A new synergy between education and cognitive neuroscience. Science, 325, 280–283. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1171999
14. Goswami, U. (2004). Neuroscience and education. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709904322848798
15. Goswami, U. (2006). Neuroscience and education: From research to practice? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 7, 406–413. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1907
16. Greene, E., & Cahill, B. S. (2011). Effects of neuroimaging evidence on mock juror decision making. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 30, 280–296. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.1993
17. Greenhoot, A. F., Semb, G., Colombo, J., & Schreiber, T. (2004). Prior beliefs and methodological concepts in scientific reasoning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18, 203–221. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.959
18. Gruber, M. J., Gelman, B. D., & Ranganath, C. (2014). States of curiosity modulate hippocampus-dependent learning via the dopaminergic circuit. Neuron, 84, 486–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2014.08.060
19. Hardiman, M., Rinne, L., Gregory, E., & Yarmolinskaya, J. (2012). Neuroethics, neuroeducation, and classroom teaching: Where the brain sciences meet pedagogy. Neuroethics, 5, 135–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-011-9116-6
20. Hattie, J. (1985). Methodology review: Assessing unidimensionality of tests and items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 139–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662168500900204
21. Hook, C. J., & Farah, M. J. (2013a). Look again: Effects of brain images and mind–brain dualism on lay evaluations of research. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 25, 1397–1405. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00407
22. Hook, C. J., & Farah, M. J. (2013b). Neuroscience for educators: What are they seeking, and what are they finding? Neuroethics, 6, 331–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-012-9159-3
23. Howard-Jones, P. A., Varma, S., Ansari, D., Butterworth, B., De Smedt, B., Goswami, U., … Thomas, M. S. C. (2016). The principles and practices of educational neuroscience: Comment on Bowers (2016). Psychological Review, 123, 620–627. https://doi.org/10/1037rev0000036
24. Hruby, G. G. (2012). Three requirements for justifying an educational neuroscience. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.2012.02068.x
25. Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2011). Implications of affective and social neuroscience for educational theory. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43, 98–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00713.x
26. Kang, M. J., Hsu, M., Krajbich, I. M., Loewenstein, G., McClure, S. M., Wang, J. T., & Camerer, C. F. (2009). The wick in the candle of learning: Epistemic curiosity activates reward circuitry and enhances memory. Psychological Science, 20, 963–973. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02402.x
27. Keehner, M., Mayberry, L., & Fischer, M. H. (2011). Different clues from different views: The role of image format in public perceptions of neuroimaging results. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 422–428. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-010-0048-7
28. Lindell, A. K., & Kidd, E. (2011). Why right-brain teaching is half-witted: A critique of the misapplication of neuroscience to education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 5, 121–127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-228X.2011.01120.x
29. McCabe, D., & Castel, A. (2008). Seeing is believing: The effect of brain images on judgments of scientific reasoning. Cognition, 107, 343–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.07.017
30. Michael, R. B., Newman, E. J., Vuorre, M., Cumming, G., & Garry, M. (2013). On the (non) persuasive power of a brain image. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 720–725. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0391-6
31. Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2, 175–220. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175
32. O'Connor, C., & Joffe, H. (2013). How has neuroscience affected lay understandings of personhood? A review of the evidence. Public Understanding of Science, 22, 254–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662513476812
33. O'Connor, C., Rees, G., & Joffe, H. (2012). Neuroscience in the public sphere. Neuron, 74, 220–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2012.04.004
34. Oppenheimer, D. M., Meyvis, T., & Davidenko, N. (2009). Instructional manipulation checks: Detecting satisficing to increase statistical power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 867–872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.03.009
35. Paolacci, G., & Chandler, J. (2014). Inside the Turk: Understanding Mechanical Turk as a participant pool. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 184–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414531598
36. Paolacci, G., Chandler, J., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010). Running experiments on Amazon mechanical Turk. Judgment and Decision making, 5, 411–419.
37. Racine, E., Bar-Ilan, O., & Illes, J. (2005). fMRI in the public eye. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6, 159–164. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1609
38. Racine, E., Waldman, S., Rosenberg, J., & Illes, J. (2010). Contemporary neuroscience in the media. Social Science & Medicine, 71, 725–733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.05.017
39. Rhodes, R. E., Rodriguez, F., & Shah, P. (2014). Explaining the alluring influence of neuroscience information on scientific reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 1432–1440. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036844
40. Schooler, J. (2011). Unpublished results hide the decline effect. Nature, 470, 437. https://doi.org/10.1038/470437a
41. Schwartz, M. (2015). Mind, brain and education: A decade of evolution. Mind, Brain, and Education, 9, 64–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12074
42. Schwartz, D. L., Blair, K. P., & Tsang, J. M. (2012). How to build an educational neuroscience: Two approaches with concrete instances. British Journal of Educational Psychology Monograph Series II: Part 8—Educational Neuroscience, 1, 9–27.
43. Schweitzer, N. J., Baker, D. A., & Risko, E. F. (2013). Fooled by the brain: Re-examining the influence of neuroimages. Cognition, 129, 501–511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.08.009
44. Schweitzer, N. J., & Saks, M. J. (2011). Neuroimage evidence and the insanity defense. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 29, 592–607. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.995
45. Scurich, N., & Shniderman, A. (2014). The selective allure of neuroscientific explanations. PLoS ONE, 9, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0107529
46. Snow, J., & Mann, M. (2013). Qualtrics survey software: Handbook for research professionals. Provo, UT: Qualtrics Labs.
47. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9
48. Varma, S., McCandliss, B. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (2008). Scientific and pragmatic challenges for bridging education and neuroscience. Educational Researcher, 37, 140–152. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08317687
49. Vul, E., Harris, C., Winkielman, P., & Pashler, H. (2009). Puzzlingly high correlations in fMRI studies of emotion, personality, and social cognition. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 274–290. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01125.x
50. Wastell, D., & White, S. (2012). Blinded by neuroscience: Social policy, the family and the infant brain. Families, Relationships and Societies, 1, 397–414. https://doi.org/10.1332/204674312X656301
51. Weisberg, D. S., Keil, F. C., Goodstein, J., Rawson, E., & Gray, J. R. (2008). The seductive allure of neuroscience explanations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 470–477. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2008.20040
52. Weisberg, D. S., Taylor, J. C., & Hopkins, E. J. (2015). Deconstructing the seductive allure of neuroscience explanations. Judgment and Decision Making, 10, 429–441.