Deconstructing the seductive allure of neuroscience explanations
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2015, Vol 10, Issue 5
Abstract
Previous work showed that people find explanations more satisfying when they contain irrelevant neuroscience information. The current studies investigate why this effect happens. In Study 1 (N=322), subjects judged psychology explanations that did or did not contain irrelevant neuroscience information. Longer explanations were judged more satisfying, as were explanations containing neuroscience information, but these two factors made independent contributions. In Study 2 (N=255), subjects directly compared good and bad explanations. Subjects were generally successful at selecting the good explanation except when the bad explanation contained neuroscience and the good one did not. Study 3 (N=159) tested whether neuroscience jargon was necessary for the effect, or whether it would obtain with any reference to the brain. Responses to these two conditions did not differ. These results confirm that neuroscience information exerts a seductive effect on people’s judgments, which may explain the appeal of neuroscience information within the public sphere.
Authors and Affiliations
Deena Skolnick Weisberg, Jordan C. V. Taylor and Emily J. Hopkins
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP678195
- DOI -
- Views 142
- Downloads 0
Political double standards in reliance on moral foundations
Prior research using the Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ) has established that political ideology is associated with self-reported reliance on specific moral foundations in moral judgments of acts. MFQ items do not...
Are neoliberals more susceptible to bullshit?
We conducted additional analyses of Pennycook et al.’s (2015, Study 2) data to investigate the possibility that there would be ideological differences in “bullshit receptivity” that would be explained by individual diffe...
Short-sighted greed? Focusing on the future promotes reputation-based generosity
Long-term thinking and voluntary resource sharing are two distinctive traits of human nature. Across three experiments (N=1,082), I propose a causal connection: Sometimes people are generous because they think about the...
Testing the effect of time pressure on asymmetric dominance and compromise decoys in choice
Dynamic, connectionist models of decision making, such as decision field theory (Roe, Busemeyer, & Townsend, 2001), propose that the effect of context on choice arises from a series of pairwise comparisons between attrib...
Gender differences in the endowment effect: Women pay less, but won’t accept less
We explore different contexts and mechanisms that might promote or alleviate the gender effect in risk aversion. Our main result is that we do not find gender differences in risk aversion when the choice is framed as a w...