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 135
- Downloads 0
Relativistic financial decisions: Context effects on retirement saving and investment risk preferences
We report a study of the effects the choice set on financial decision making related to retirement savings and risky investment. The participants were presented with either a full range of choice options or a limited sub...
Why do we overestimate others’ willingness to pay?
People typically overestimate how much others are prepared to pay for consumer goods and services. We investigated the extent to which latent beliefs about others’ affluence contribute to this overestimation. In Studies...
The rich get richer and the poor get poorer: On risk aversion in behavioral decision-making
Some studies have found that choices become more risk averse after gains and more risk seeking after losses, although other studies have found the opposite. The latter tend to use hypothetical cases that encourage delibe...
Decisions by coin toss: Inappropriate but fair
In many situations of indeterminacy, where people agree that no decisive arguments favor one alternative to another, they are still strongly opposed to resolving the dilemma by a coin toss. The robustness of this judgmen...
The Maximization Inventory
We present the Maximization Inventory, which consists of three separate scales: decision difficulty, alternative search, and satisficing. We show that the items of the Maximization Inventory have much better psychometric...