Motivation, cognition and pseudoscience

Abstract

The article proposes a framework that views pseudoscientific beliefs as a joint function of the basic social motives and the default way of processing everyday information. The interplay between the basic motives and experiential thinking is illustrated with three examples. The first concerns comprehension of self via astrology and graphology, and the second involves the comprehension of unexpected events (one domain of the motive to comprehend the world). The last example describes health control by alternative medicine, as a modern way of controlling future outcomes.

Sınıf Öğretmeni Adaylarının Epistemolojik İnançları ile Sözde-Bilimsel İnançları

“…Yet, they had pseudoscientific beliefs such as fortune and dream interpretation. Lindeman (1998) stated that individuals have pseudoscientific beliefs since they meet their basic social motives and explain unexpected event. Therefore, it can be said that although pre-service teachers know they are not scientific, they still have pseudoscientific beliefs.…”

Gut bacteria and health foods—the European perspective

“…There is also a challenge to present the knowledge produced by science in ways that are comprehensible for the consumer. Consumer thinking is based on dichotomic thinking and approximation (Lindeman, 1998), whereas scientific thinking uses probabilities and accepts a certain degree of uncertainty. For consumers questions tend to have yes or no answers, and even with deficient pieces of information consumers tend to build holistic rationales for themselves.…”

Effects of Exposure to Pseudoscientific Television Programs upon Taiwanese Citizens' Pseudoscientific Beliefs

“…Effects of Exposure to Pseudoscientific Television Programs upon Taiwanese Citizens' Pseudoscientific Beliefs Introduction Scholars in a variety of disciplines have devoted increasing attention over the last decade to the study of pseudoscientific beliefs (Lilienfeld, Lohr, & Morier, 2001;Lindeman, 1998;Sparks & Miller, 2001). Science educators have been concerned with the rising public acceptance of pseudoscientific claims (National Science Board, 2000, 2006.…”

“…Science educators have been concerned with the rising public acceptance of pseudoscientific claims (National Science Board, 2000, 2006. Continual acceptance and dependence on such unproven claims may elicit negative or erroneous attitudes in life or even lead to sickness and economic loss (Bunge, 2011;Lilienfeld et al, 2001;Lindeman, 1998;Lundström, 2007;National Science Board, 2006).…”

“…Pseudoscience has been seen as claims that are formed based on a system of theories, assumptions, and methods that may be perceived to be scientific but actually lack empirical evidence (Lindeman, 1998;Preece & Baxter, 2000;Shermer, 1997;Turgut, 2011). Paranormal claims can also be thought as a subset of pseudoscience and rely on explanations that contravene some fundamental assumptions of science (Eder, Turic, Milasowszky, Van Adzin, & Hergovich, 2011;Lindeman, 1998;Sparks & Miller, 2001).…”