Results 1 - 10
of
22
The Feasibility of Folk Science
- Cognitive science
, 2010
"... Abstract If folk science means individuals having well worked out mechanistic theories of the workings of the world, then it is not feasible. Laypeople's explanatory understandings are remarkably coarse, full of gaps, and often full of inconsistencies. Even worse, most people overestimate thei ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 6 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract If folk science means individuals having well worked out mechanistic theories of the workings of the world, then it is not feasible. Laypeople's explanatory understandings are remarkably coarse, full of gaps, and often full of inconsistencies. Even worse, most people overestimate their own understandings. Yet recent views suggest that formal scientists may not be so different. In spite of these limitations, science somehow works and its success offers hope for the feasibility of folk science as well. The success of science arises from the ways in which scientists learn to leverage understandings in other minds and to outsource explanatory work through sophisticated methods of deference and simplification of complex systems. Three studies ask whether analogous processes might be present not only in laypeople but also in young children and thereby form a foundation for supplementing explanatory understandings almost from the start of our first attempts to make sense of the world.
Getting to Darwin: Obstacles to Accepting Evolution by Natural Selection
"... Abstract Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection is central to modern biology, but is resisted by many people. This paper discusses the major psychological obstacles to accepting Darwin’s theory. Cognitive obstacles to adopting evolution by natural selection include conceptual difficulties ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 6 (1 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection is central to modern biology, but is resisted by many people. This paper discusses the major psychological obstacles to accepting Darwin’s theory. Cognitive obstacles to adopting evolution by natural selection include conceptual difficulties, methodological issues, and coherence problems that derive from the intuitiveness of alternative theories. The main emotional obstacles to accepting evolution are its apparent conflict with valued beliefs about God, souls, and morality. We draw on the philosophy of science and on a psychological theory of cognitive and emotional belief revision to make suggestions about what can be done to improve acceptance of
Death and Science: The Existential Underpinnings of Belief in Intelligent Design and Discomfort with Evolution
, 2011
"... The present research examined the psychological motives underlying widespread support for intelligent design theory (IDT), a purportedly scientific theory that lacks any scientific evidence; and antagonism toward evolutionary theory (ET), a theory supported by a large body of scientific evidence. We ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 4 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
The present research examined the psychological motives underlying widespread support for intelligent design theory (IDT), a purportedly scientific theory that lacks any scientific evidence; and antagonism toward evolutionary theory (ET), a theory supported by a large body of scientific evidence. We tested whether these attitudes are influenced by IDT’s provision of an explanation of life’s origins that better addresses existential concerns than ET. In four studies, existential threat (induced via reminders of participants ’ own mortality) increased acceptance of IDT and/or rejection of ET, regardless of participants ’ religion, religiosity, educational background, or preexisting attitude toward evolution. Effects were reversed by teaching participants that naturalism can be a source of existential meaning (Study 4), and among natural-science students for whom ET may already provide existential meaning (Study 5). These reversals suggest that the effect of heightened mortality awareness on attitudes toward ET and IDT is due to a desire to find greater meaning and purpose in science when existential threats are activated.
Rethinking the role of resubsumption in conceptual change
- Educational Psychologist
, 2009
"... Why is conceptual change difficult yet possible? Ohlsson (2009/this issue) proposes that the answer can be found in the dynamics of resubsumption, or the process by which a domain of experience is resubsumed under an intuitive theory originally constructed to explain some other domain of experience. ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 2 (2 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Why is conceptual change difficult yet possible? Ohlsson (2009/this issue) proposes that the answer can be found in the dynamics of resubsumption, or the process by which a domain of experience is resubsumed under an intuitive theory originally constructed to explain some other domain of experience. Here, it is argued that conceptual change is difficult in two distinct senses—that is, difficult to initiate and difficult to complete—and that Ohlsson’s proposal addresses the latter but not the former. The implications of this argument for how conceptual change might be best facilitated in the science classroom are discussed as well. In a classic study by McCloskey, Caramazza, and Green (1980), college undergraduates were asked to draw the tra-jectory of a ball shot through a curved tube resting on a flat surface. Although most participants had taken one or more physics courses prior to the study, many still drew physi-cally impossible trajectories—that is, trajectories in which the ball continued to travel in a curved motion after exiting the tube. This intuition is inconsistent not only with the way objects actually move but also with the Newtonian principles these students had presumably learned in their prior course-work. From where do such misconceptions arise? Why do such misconceptions persist in the face of contrary experi-ence and instruction? And how might such misconceptions be eliminated? These are the questions at the heart of science education research, both in the physical sciences (Clement, 1982; Hal-loun & Hestenes, 1985; Vosniadou & Brewer, 1992) and the
The Implications of the Cognitive Sciences for the Relation Between Religion and Science Education: The Case of Evolutionary Theory
, 2011
"... Abstract This paper discusses the relationship between religion and science education in the light of the cognitive sciences. We challenge the popular view that science and religion are compatible, a view that suggests that learning and understanding evolutionary theory has no effect on students ’ r ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 2 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Abstract This paper discusses the relationship between religion and science education in the light of the cognitive sciences. We challenge the popular view that science and religion are compatible, a view that suggests that learning and understanding evolutionary theory has no effect on students ’ religious beliefs and vice versa. We develop a cognitive perspective on how students manage to reconcile evolutionary theory with their religious beliefs. We underwrite the claim developed by cognitive scientists and anthropologists that religion is natural because it taps into people’s intuitive understanding of the natural world which is constrained by essentialist, teleological and intentional biases. After contrasting the naturalness of religion with the unnaturalness of science, we discuss the difficulties cognitive and developmental scientists have identified in learning and accepting evolu-tionary theory. We indicate how religious beliefs impede students ’ understanding and acceptance of evolutionary theory. We explore a number of options available to students for reconciling an informed understanding of evolutionary theory with their religious beliefs. To conclude, we discuss the implications of our account for science and biology teachers. 1
Epistemic Similarities Between Students ’ Scientific and Supernatural Beliefs
"... The evidential support for scientific claims is quantitatively and qualitatively superior to that for supernatural claims, yet students may not appreciate this difference in light of the fact that both types of claims are learned in similar ways (through testimony rather than firsthand observation) ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 1 (1 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
The evidential support for scientific claims is quantitatively and qualitatively superior to that for supernatural claims, yet students may not appreciate this difference in light of the fact that both types of claims are learned in similar ways (through testimony rather than firsthand observation) and perform similar functions (explaining observed phenomena in terms of unobservable entities). The present study addressed this issue by comparing students ’ scientific beliefs with their supernatural beliefs along 4 dimensions of epistemic import: personal confidence, perceived consensus, means of justification, and openness to revision. Participants ’ scientific beliefs were strongly differentiated from their supernatural beliefs along the dimensions of confidence and consensus but only weakly differentiated along the dimensions of justification and revision, particularly for participants with (a) higher levels of supernatural belief and (b) lower levels of understanding of the nature of science. Moreover, participants ’ confidence in both types of beliefs was associated with their consensus estimates but not with their ability to cite evidence in support of, or potentially in conflict with, those beliefs. These findings imply that many students ’ scientific beliefs are qualitatively similar to their supernatural beliefs, despite self-perceptions to the contrary.
The implications of the cognitive sciences for the relation between religion and science education: the case of evolutionary theory
"... This paper has been accepted for publication in Science & Education. The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
This paper has been accepted for publication in Science & Education. The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com
unknown title
"... This paper has been accepted for publication in Science & Education. The final ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
This paper has been accepted for publication in Science & Education. The final
Gelman & Rhodes 1
"... "Two-‐thousand years of stasis”: How psychological essentialism impedes evolutionary understanding ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
"Two-‐thousand years of stasis”: How psychological essentialism impedes evolutionary understanding
