This is a great blog post that I’ve been wanting to reblog for a while now. And since I’m on vacation this week, it seemed the perfect time! Enjoy!
Last week I discovered this wonderful lecture by Dorothy Bisshop that everybody interested in research should take time for.
In her lecture she mentions several research-papers and 2 are definitely worth a closer look.
First there is this 2008 research by Weisberg et Al. from which this is the abstract:
Explanations of psychological phenomena seem to generate more public interest when they contain neuroscientific information. Even irrelevant neuroscience information in an explanation of a psychological phenomenon may interfere with people’s abilities to critically consider the underlying logic of this explanation. We tested this hypothesis by giving naïve adults, students in a neuroscience course, and neuroscience experts brief descriptions of psychological phenomena followed by one of four types of explanation, according to a 2 (good explanation vs. bad explanation) × 2 (without neuroscience vs. with neuroscience) design. Crucially, the neuroscience information was irrelevant to the logic of the explanation, as…
View original post 269 more words