Distracted drivers is probably one of the most serious issues for drivers these days. Since I returned to riding a motorcycle to and from work, I've been much more aware of the problem, and I see it every single time I get behind the wheel or on my bike. We don't need another distraction while we drive, but the communication and automotive industry have made it feel like it is an acceptable risk.
It is a hot button for me and I try to tell people, don't do it. I do not use my cell phone while driving. If it rings, the person on the other end can wait. Leave a message. There is nothing so urgent that I need to break away from my driving to use my phone... ever.
No one should.
U Drive. U Text. U Pay
By Mike Howard
One of the curses of being human is that we are hard-wired for delusion. The good news is that not only is it perfectly normal, but our mis-beliefs are the very thing that have, in large part, kept us around for many generations. In any given moment, millions of thoughts pervade our brains, effecting the day-to-day moment-by-moment decisions we make. We are under the false impression, however that we are beings of pure logic: Whether it’s a decision to play Candy Crush rather than hit the gym or flip through another top 20 Buzzfeed article rather than chopping up some veggies to take to work, we falter in many ways that effect our productivity, which in turn prevents us from our goals.
The 5 Cognitive Biases That Are Sabotaging Your Fat Loss Goals
The first step towards making good decisions about our health is to know our number 1 enemy. In this case, the enemy is ruthless, cunning and persistent. It is the 120 year-old Kung-Fu Shaolin Monk who discovered the fountain of youth. I’m speaking of course of our own brains.
One of the primary reasons why humans struggle in many aspects of life is that our brains were designed in an era when the best way to save was to consume. The good news is that our biology and brain wiring is flexible – responsive to experience and therefore “trainable” to work in our favors. We have biological disadvantages to be sure, but they are not life sentences.
Here are some of the most prominent cognitive errors that prevent us from our fat loss goals and what to do about it;
1. Current Moment Bias (Restraint Bias/Hyperbolic Discounting)
Among other deficits, we Homo Sapiens kind of suck at both predicting a future scenario and how we will respond to said scenario. We are a society of instant gratification – prone to the roller coaster swings of hedonic adaptation. Not surprisingly most of us would rather experience pleasure in the current moment, while leaving the pain for later – even if the long-term reward is greater.
This is a bias that is of particular concern when it comes to achieving fat loss and greater health. A 1998 study confirmed the old adage “The road to hell is paved with good intentions”, 74% of participants chose fruit over junk food when asked what they would choose a week from that point when they became hungry. But when the day arrived, 70% chose chocolate. (1)
This is the precise reason we watch “Dumb and Dumber” on TV for the 100th time while “The English Patient” sits (not so patiently) in our Netflix cue. It’s why we are forced to throw out produce weekly that was originally destined to be consumed as salad and part of a stir fry.
We are wired to seek immediate payoff. Most people would rather take $5 now than $7 in a week. At the heart of this phenomena (termed hyperbolic discounting) is impulsiveness and our ability (or inability) to delay gratification. This phenomenon was tested in children in the well-known “marshmallow experiment” (2), where children were told they could eat the marshmallow now or wait for a bigger reward that would come later. Long-term follow-ups showed the children who could hold out for longer generally did better later on in life – getting better grades, having lower BMI and achieving more success in general.
What to do: The first defense toward combating the current moment bias is to pause and reflect. Think about the choice you are making, why you are making it and think about the long-term benefits of abstaining from an unhealthy move. The first step of self-discipline is self-awareness. When you start to dig below the surface of the conscious mind, the previously subconscious habits that once pulled you off track will repair themselves. Learn about WHY you fail: What types of situations/emotions trigger poor choices?
Even a simple strategy such as the “10 minute rule” can help avert derailing indulgences. If you want something, wait 10 minutes (or longer if possible). In this time reflect on whether you are really hungry or if you are responding to a fleeting emotion.
2. Negativity bias
The negativity bias is the tendency to put more emphasis on negative experiences rather than positive ones. You may have noticed this tendency in yourself (although more likely in others); the glass half-empty-ers, the “negative Nancy’s” – people who perpetually see more threats than opportunities and more bad than good in the world.
Negativity bias can permeate in different ways and can pull you off track when it comes to health-promoting habits. Whether it’s remembering a past injury from exercise, or how miserable you were on your last diet, our brains bring us back to those recollections – even if you had many positive experiences with trying to improve health. In the case of fat loss, many will only remember the intervention of choice didn’t “work”.
Media and pop diet book culture serve to fuel the negativity through fear-mongering rhetoric about myriad topics. These imposed fears override any positive message about exercise or healthful eating we could ever hear about. We tend to become paralyzed and frustrated by the information – rendering us to a “screw it” kind of mentality.
What to do: The best mindset in this situation is to recall your successes. Even if you haven’t had much in the way of body composition successes, it’s important to re-wire your brain towards the positive experiences of training and eating well. Find your “flow” or that happy place where you are in a zone with movement. Take note of how good your body feels after a healthy meal. Also, be sure to gravitate towards activities you enjoy.
3. Optimism Bias
The other side of the self-fulfilling prophesy coin is the optimism bias. While optimism is generally a helpful state of mind, there is a tipping point when it comes to positive thinking. The optimism bias (also known as unrealistic or comparative optimism) ruses its victim into unrealistic expectations and Pollyanna-esque swagger. In essence, we are prone to having too much unguarded optimism and not enough realism. Being overly optimistic can in fact derail your fat loss goals for 2 reasons;
1). It Keeps us from changing in the first place: If we believe “everything will be fine” when it comes to our health, it locks us into place. We pay no attention to what we eat, how little we move and the associated long-term consequences of those habits.
2). It prevents us from having a relapse plan: One of the most formidable obstacles to long-term success is failing to have a contingency plan for when you go off the rails.
If you are finding yourself perpetually optimistic without any results, it may be time to temper it with some reality. Successful fat loss often depends on a nice dance of levity and gravity.
What to do: Optimism is good, but be cautiously (realistically) optimistic. Understand that real life gets in the way of our perfect plans. Set goals, standards and make healthy decisions – but do so in a frame of reality. Understand the journey will not be smooth, linear or easy.
Consider adjusting your self-talk. While saying “I can’t do this” is negative (remember item #2?), “I CAN do this” is surface level and lacks substance. Some psychologists suggest implementing what’s called “interrogative self-talk”. Instead of “I can’t” or “I can”, ask the question “can I?” and "how can I?". By framing as a question, you are setting off a thought process that strategizes HOW you are going to accomplish something, rather than just stating an abstract thought. (3)
4. Planning Fallacy
The planning fallacy is a tendency for people to underestimate how long they will need to complete a task. The term was first proposed in a 1979 paper by world-renown cognitive scientists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky. The planning fallacy might be seen as a natural extension to the optimism bias in that we are being overly generous as to a perceived outcome and how long it should take to achieve it. When it comes to body composition goals, we grossly underestimate the time involved in achieving more significant losses.
The epicenter of the planning fallacy as it relates to weight loss can be found in the diet fad industry. The emergence of get-lean-quick schemes that pervade western society have systematically eradicated any realistic expectation when it comes to our perceptions of “normal” rates of fat loss. At the time of this writing, 3 books in the “diet book” section of the local book store promise weight loss at the rate of 1lb a day! Festooned on the cover of most diet books, weight loss clinics and web click ads are far-fetched weight loss claims.. “25 lbs in a month”, “10 lbs in 2 weeks”. It’s no wonder our expectations and askew when it comes to our weight loss goals.
Studies have demonstrated a strong correlation between high weight loss expectations and drop-out rates in weight loss programs (4, 5). The Dalle study showed the strongest predictors of attrition at 12 months (52% dropped out) were lower age and higher expected 1-year BMI loss, which reflects a tendency towards unrealistic expectations when it comes to weight loss time frames.
What to do: Calibrate your expectations. Remember if you are carrying 50 lbs more than you’d like, you didn’t gain that weight in a matter of a month or 2. With ebbs and flows of life it’s important to have relapse plans and have some wiggle room with regards to how long it might take to achieve your goal. Take pride and seek accomplishment in the journey.
5. Unit bias:
The unit bias suggests that we look at units or portions and perceive them as appropriate or optimal – regardless of reality. Brian Wansink, author of “Mindless Eating” demonstrated through a series of studies that when we are served larger portions, we eat more. Whether it’s a bottomless bowl of soup (participants consumed 73% more soup when it was being slowly refilled unbeknownst to the subjects) or big popcorn bags, (6, 7) (subjects consumed 45% more when given a larger bag. Even when the popcorn was stale, there was a 34% higher consumption).
Liquid calories fare no better when it comes to our perceived consumption. One of our many human flaws is that we don’t have 3 dimensional perception of volume (or even 2 dimensional for that matter). When it comes to volume we gauge only height. That’s why when given equal volume, we think there is more liquid in a tall, thin glass than a small wide one. It’s no wonder bars serve drinks in tall glasses and charge more for it.
Wanskink’s research again found that a group of participants (many of them bartenders) poured significantly more liquid in short, wide glasses than in tall, skinny ones of the same volume. Even the ones that poured drinks for a living poured 21% more into the stout glasses! (8) Misleading perceptions of quantity aren’t confined to just laypeople either, with studies showing registered dieticians having trouble with the accuracy of food portions – underestimating their consumption by around 10% (9).
Unit bias may be one of the most prominent determinants of how much we consume – with our north American super-sized tendencies.
What to do: First and foremost pay attention to your hunger and fullness cues. Eat slowly, consume joyfully and mindfully. Use smaller plates and bowls and buy tall, thin drinking glasses. In restaurants, make it the norm to take some to go (try for half). If you are snacking on a bagged product, pour some into a small bowl and put the bag out of sight.
Take-home points: Many of our moment-to-moment decisions are driven by our subconscious minds. More often than not, our brains' hard wiring conspires against us in our efforts to lose fat. Forming sustainable habits is the key to successful fat loss. Forming these habits is a matter of self-discipline and self-discipline is a matter of self-awareness.
References:
1. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9831521
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_marshmallow_experiment
3. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20424090
4. http://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/16339128
5. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16339128
6.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15761167
7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16053812
8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1322248/
9. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12396160
This is a reprint of the April 1, 2015 eSkeptic magazine.
BY MICHAEL SHERMER
The Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California is the home of many of the world’s leading scientists and engineers who launch spacecraft deep into the solar system to find out what’s out there. Apparently they could save taxpayers a lot of money if they simply employed a different kind of science practiced by Scientologists, as described to me by one such rocket scientist once employed there:
I was working at JPL, and my immediate supervisor was a dedicated Scientologist. This supervisor had just advanced from Clear to OT I. Some people at a meeting asked him what this meant, and he explained that he now had the ability to detach his thetan from his body and cause it to perform useful out-of-body functions. For example, if he needed to purchase a certain item and he drove past a store that might or might not have that item, he could send his thetan into the store to look for the item. If the thetan reported the item was in stock, my boss would then park the car and go in and buy it. Unfortunately for JPL there was a senior NASA official in the audience. The official noted that NASA was about to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to send another robotic spacecraft to Mars. He asked if my supervisor would be willing to send his thetan to Mars to gather the needed data, presumably at lower cost. The supervisor replied that this could in fact be done, and that other OT’s from the Hollywood church would probably offer their services too. JPL was severely criticized by NASA, and warned of serious consequences if this got into the newspapers.
The thetan reference stems from Scientology’s genesis story that is only revealed after parishioners (a.k.a. customers) pay tens of thousands of dollars to reach Operating Thetan Level III. This science fiction UFO fantasy story is now so widely known that it was even featured in a 2005 episode of the animated sitcom television series South Park. Around 75 million years ago Xenu, the story begins, the ruler of a Galactic Confederation of 76 planets, transported billions of his charges in spaceships similar to DC-8 jets to a planet called Teegeeack (Earth). He then vaporized them with Hydrogen bombs, scattering to the winds their souls, called thetans, which were then rounded up in electronic traps and implanted with false ideas. These corrupted thetans are still around and can attach themselves to people today, leading to drug and alcohol abuse, addiction, depression, and other psychological and social ailments that only Scientology “auditing” employing Electropsychometers (E-meters) and numerous associated classes can cure.
As a student of religion, curious about the genesis of such genesis stories, I tracked down the origin of the Xenu tale through the acclaimed author Harlan Ellison, who told me he was there at the birth of Scientology. At a late 1940s meeting in New York of a science fiction writer’s group called the Hydra Club, then science fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard was complaining to L. Sprague de Camp and the other club members about writing for a penny a word. “Lester del Rey then said half jokingly, ‘What you really ought to do is create a religion because it will be tax free,’ and at that point everyone in the room started chiming in with ideas for this new religion. So the idea was a Gestalt that Ron caught on to and assimilated the details. He then wrote it up as ‘Dianetics: A New Science of the Mind’ and sold it to John W. Campbell, Jr., who published it in Astounding Science Fiction in 1950.”
Astounding indeed that anyone would accept such science fiction as fact, but such is the power of belief when coupled to a handful of powerful psychological principles. Consider cognitive dissonance, discovered by the psychologist Leon Festinger in 1954 when he joined a UFO end-of-the-world cult on a mountain top to record what would happen when the mothership failed to arrive at the designated midnight hour on December 21st. Festinger saw this as an opportunity to study the phenomenon of mental tension created when someone holds two conflicting thoughts simultaneously:
Suppose an individual believes something with his whole heart; suppose further that he has a commitment to this belief, that he has taken irrevocable actions because of it; finally, suppose that he is presented with evidence, unequivocal and undeniable evidence, that his belief is wrong: what will happen? The individual will frequently emerge, not only unshaken, but even more convinced of the truth of his beliefs than ever before. Indeed, he may even show a new fervor about convincing and converting other people to his view.
That is exactly what happened with the UFO cult, whose members reduced the dissonance triggered by the failed prophecy by going out into the community to recruit new members. The greater the cost, the higher the gain on the dissonance dial that can only be assuaged by further reinforcing the veracity of the belief, no matter how preposterous it may seem to outsiders who do not share the dissonance given their skepticism. So it is with Scientology, whose members pay a high price indeed in every sense of that word.
Is Scientology a Cult?
First, though it is recognized by the IRS as a tax-exempt religion, no other religion that I know of considers their theological doctrines and core religious tenets to be intellectual property accessible only for a fee. Envision converting to Judaism but having to pay for courses in order to hear the story of Abraham and Isaac, Noah and the flood, or Moses and the Ten Commandments. Or imagine joining the Catholic Church but not being told about the crucifixion and the resurrection until you have reached Operating Theological Level III, which can only be attained after many years and tens of thousands of dollars in churchrun courses. That is, in essence, how the Church of Scientology dispenses its theology.
Second, a sociological definition of a cult is that it is a group with novel religious beliefs and a high degree of tension with the surrounding society (as contrasted with a sect, or a group with traditional religious beliefs and a high degree of tension with the surrounding society). The great sociologist of religion Rodney Stark has noted that most religions start out as cults, then either die out or become sects, which in turn either die out or transition into a mainstream religion.
Third, consider these characteristics of a cult:
• Veneration of the Leader: Excessive glorification of the leader to the point of virtual sainthood or divinity.
• Inerrancy of the Leader: Belief that the leader cannot be wrong in pronouncements on virtually all subjects, from existential to trivial.
• Dissent is Discouraged: Questioning and doubt among members is punished.
• Absolute Truth: Belief that the leader and/or group has a method of discovering final knowledge on any and all subjects.
• Absolute Morality: Belief that the leader and/or the group have developed a system of right and wrong thought and action applicable to members and nonmembers alike.
• In-Group/Out-Group Mentality: Polarization of members and nonmembers into “us v. them”.
• Ends Justify the Means: Leads to members doing things they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group.
• Deceit and Hidden Agendas: Potential recruits and the public are not given a full disclosure of the true nature of the group’s beliefs and plans, and flaws of the leader or potentially embarrassing events in the group’s history are covered up.
• Financial and/or Sexual Exploitation: Recruits and followers are persuaded to invest in the group, and the leader may develop sexual relations with one or more of the followers.
• Mind-Altering Practices: Meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, and debilitating work routines are used to reinforce group think.
• Lack of Accountability: The group and leader are not accountable to any outside authorities.
• Isolation from Friends and Family: Normal reality checks are blocked for members.
• Aggressive Recruitment Practices: Members are strongly encouraged to bring in new members and raise money for the group.
• Persuasive Techniques: Special psychological methods are employed to recruit new followers and reinforce beliefs.
Fourth, compare this list with these noteworthy facts about Scientology as documented and described by the investigative journalist Janet Reitman in her 2006 Rolling Stone magazine article and subsequently her 2011 book, Inside Scientology:
• Scientology’s founder L. Ron Hubbard defined it as “the study of truth.”
• Scientology calls itself “the world’s fastest-growing religion” with 10 million members in 159 countries and more than 6,000 Scientology churches, missions and outreach groups across the globe. In fact, a 2001 survey conducted by the City University of New York found only 55,000 people in the United States who claimed to be Scientologists. Worldwide, some observers believe a reasonable estimate of Scientology’s core practicing membership ranges between 100,000 and 200,000.
• Scientology’s holdings, which include real estate on several continents, are widely assumed to value in the billions of dollars.
• Scientology’s practices and processes are highly controlled, and, at the advanced levels, highly secretive.
• Unique among religions, Scientology withholds key aspects of its central theology from all but its most exalted followers. This would be akin to the Catholic Church refusing to tell all but a select number of the faithful that Jesus Christ died for their sins.
• Members are isolated and live in a parallel world with the secular world.
• Scientology has its own nomenclature, guidelines for living, and ethical code that it enforces.
• The Bridge to Total Freedom is the goal, and it is expensive: Auditing is purchased in 12.5-hour blocks, known as “intensives.” Each intensive can cost anywhere from $750 for introductory sessions to between $8,000 and $9,000 for advanced sessions. People spend 10s to 100s of thousands of dollars in auditing.
Is Scientology a cult? You be the judge. There is no scientifically-determined number of characteristics from the list that establishes the diagnostic label, but as you read the Skeptic magazine cover story on Scientology and as you read and hear about Scientology in the news, you might recall some of these salient points. In my opinion, if Scientology is not a cult, then nothing is a cult and the term has no meaning.
Danish writer Mikael Wulff and cartoon artist Anders Morgenthaler - the creative duo known as Wumo - has created a brilliant series of graphs that illustrate the basic painful truths of everyday life in the Western world.Their graphs and diagrams are snarky and sarcastic but, for the most part, true. This, coupled with their simple and official-looking design, makes them a delight to look at.
Wulff and Morgenthaler share these images on Wumo (formerly known as Wulffmorgenthaler).If you think you may have seen their work before, it should come as no surprise - they are a fairly successful cartoon duo.Their rise to success started in 2001, when they entered and won a cartoon competition. When they won, they received a one-month run of their comic strip in Politiken, a national Danish newspaper. Their popularity soared with the new exposure, and they soon found more and more publishers, including several blogs and newspapers throughout Scandinavia and Germany.
Their most recent accomplishment was becoming a regular cartoon strip in the New York Times.
I have not validated any of these, but they sound legit.
=======================================
- Glass takes one million years to decompose, which means it never wears out and can be recycled an infinite amount of times!
- Gold is the only metal that doesn't rust, even if it's buried in the ground for thousands of years.
- Your tongue is the only muscle in your body that is attached at only one end.
- If you stop getting thirsty, you need to drink more water. When a human body is dehydrated, its thirst mechanism shuts off.
- Zero is the only number that cannot be represented by Roman numerals.
- Kites were used in the American Civil War to deliver letters and newspapers.
- The song, Auld Lang Syne, is sung at the stroke of midnight in almost every English-speaking country in the world to bring in the new year.
- Drinking water AFTER eating reduces the acid in your mouth by 61 percent.
- Peanut oil is used for cooking in submarines because it doesn't smoke unless it's heated above 450F.
- The roar that we hear when we place a seashell next to our ear is not the ocean, but rather the sound of blood surging through the veins in the ear.
- Nine out of every 10 living things live in the ocean.
- The banana cannot reproduce itself. It can be propagated only by the hand of man.
- Airports at higher altitudes require a longer airstrip due to lower air density.
- The University of Alaska spans four time zones.
- The tooth is the only part of the human body that cannot heal itself.
- In ancient Greece, tossing an apple to a girl was a traditional proposal of marriage. Catching it meant she accepted.
- Warner Communications paid $28 million for the copyright to the song Happy Birthday.
- Intelligent people have more zinc and copper in their hair.
- A comet's tail always points away from the sun.
- The Swine Flu vaccine in 1976 caused more death and illness than the disease it was intended to prevent.
- Caffeine increases the power of aspirin and other painkillers, that is why it is found in some medicines.
- The military salute is a motion that evolved from medieval times, when knights in armor raised their visors to reveal their identity.
- If you get into the bottom of a well or a tall chimney and look up, you can see stars, even in the middle of the day.
- When a person dies, hearing is the last sense to go. The first sense lost is sight.
- In ancient times strangers shook hands to show that they were unarmed.
- Strawberries are the only fruits whose seeds grow on the outside.
- Avocados have the highest calories of any fruit at 167 calories per hundred grams.
- The moon moves about two inches away from the Earth each year.
- The Earth gets 100 tons heavier every day due to falling space dust.
- Due to earth's gravity it is impossible for mountains to be higher than 15,000 meters.
- Mickey Mouse is known as "Topolino" in Italy.
- Soldiers do not march in step when going across bridges because they could set up a vibration which could be sufficient to knock the bridge down.
- Everything weighs one percent less at the equator.
- For every extra kilogram carried on a space flight, 530 kg of excess fuel are needed at lift-off.
- The letter J does not appear anywhere on the periodic table of the elements.
This is a reprint of the eSkeptic Magazine of 25 March, 2015.
BY KEVIN MCCAFFREE & ANONDAH SAIDE
Critical thinking has long been recognized as the vehicle by which individuals make informed decisions. Yet, shockingly little understanding exists of how critical thinking strategies are best diffused to the public. In the U.S. there are several regional grassroots organizations such as the Center for Applied Rationality that exist to encourage the development of critical thinking skills. Strategies are numerous and varied, ranging from straightforward group discussions of cognitive biases to thought experiments designed to improve objectivity and to develop the ability to see things from another’s perspective. In addition to such organizations that target individuals, groups and corporations, many colleges and universities offer classes that teach critical thinking strategies.
The Skeptics Society’s own Skeptical Studies Curriculum Resource Center, informally known as Skepticism 101, provides hundreds of resources from professors across the country actively teaching their own critical thinking courses. The skeptical and secular community feel the high percentage of the general public who believe pseudoscientific claims is worrisome, and education is seen as the means by which believers can be reasoned out of their misconceptions. Indeed, with survey data showing that between 67 and 73 percent of adults in the U.S. subscribe to at least one paranormal belief1, 2 this topic needs empirical clarification.
Education and Paranormal Belief
Unfortunately, the empirical relation between educational attainment in general, and belief in the paranormal (e.g., in ghosts, astrology, telepathy) is a murky one. The results of research on whether education (as measured by number of years of formal education received) decreases belief have been mixed. Sociologist Erich Goode3 has shown that educational attainment doesn’t necessarily reduce belief in supra-empirical ideas, but rather it appears to moderate it. Educated people tend to simply believe different (demonstrably false) things than less educated people. For example, in a study by Tom Rice, college educated individuals were more likely to believe in psychic healing and déjà vu, while those with only a high school education were more likely to believe in traditional religion and astrology.4 The Baylor Religion Survey found that individuals with less than a high school diploma were more likely to have consulted a psychic, while college graduates were more likely to claim an out-of-body experience.1 This suggests that rather than decreasing belief, education influences the nature of the beliefs a person holds (e.g., belief in homeopathy v. astrology).
Critical Thinking and Paranormal Belief
Given that educational attainment in general is not a prophylactic against holding supernatural or paranormal ideas, researchers have zeroed in on critical thinking training. However, research on critical thinking indicates that current training strategies in general do not necessarily decrease belief in the supernatural. An Austrian study that utilized both the Cornell Critical Thinking Test and Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal found no significant relation between these measures and belief in the paranormal. On the other hand, there is some evidence showing that individuals with an analytical cognitive style subscribe to distinctly less conventional views of God (e.g., deistic, pantheistic).5 Other research has shown that individuals usually endorse supernatural beliefs simply because of a perceived consensus among others that these beliefs are, in fact, justified.6, 7 Thus, individuals may not necessarily—or at least consistently—engage their critical faculties in the assessment of supernatural beliefs; they may evaluate only the probability of their truth given the beliefs of others in their environment, and choose to believe (or not) on that basis.
This paper provides some evidence in support of the view that critical thinking may be as social as it is psychological. For the most part teaching critical thinking has focused on imparting specific cognitive skills to an individual thinker. What many critical thinking seminars and college courses overlook is the role of “fitting in”—critical thought may be as much about avoiding judgment and punishment from others as it is about the deployment of some “toolbox” of thinking strategies.
Despite the commonly held view that being aware of our cognitive biases is useful in combating faulty thinking, we argue that critical thinking is not strictly a cognitive issue. Too much focus on the psychological aspects that influence critical thinking may obscure the role played by a strong need to be social and to fit in. We present a meta-analysis that combines the results of multiple peer-reviewed studies published over the last several decades that evaluate the success of teaching critical thinking strategies in the classroom. In addition, we discuss some reasons for their limited impact.
Revised Paranormal Belief Scale 9
Please put a number next to each item to indicate how much you agree or disagree with that item. Use the numbers as indicated below. There are no right or wrong answers. This is a sample of your own beliefs and attitudes. Thank you.
1 = Strongly Disagree
2 = Moderately Disagree
3 = Slightly Disagree
4 = Uncertain
5 = Slightly Agree
6 = Moderately Agree
7 = Strongly Agree
1 The soul continues to exist though the body may die.
2 Some individuals are able to levitate (lift) objects through mental forces.
3 Black magic really exists.
4 Black cats can bring bad luck.
5 Your mind or soul can leave your body and travel (astral projection).
6 The abominable snowman of Tibet exists.
7 Astrology is a way to accurately predict the future.
8 There is a devil.
9 Psychokinesis, the movement of objects through psychic powers, does exist.
10 Witches do exist.
11 If you break a mirror, you will have bad luck.
12 During altered states, such as sleep or trances, the spirit can leave the body.
13 The Loch Ness monster of Scotland exists.
14 The horoscope accurately tells a person’s future.
15 I believe in God
16 A person’s thoughts can influence the movement of a physical object.
17 Through the use of formulas and incantations, it is possible to cast spells on persons.
18 The number “13” is unlucky.
19 Reincarnation does occur.
20 There is life on other planets.
21 Some psychics can accurately predict the future.
22 There is a heaven and a hell.
23 Mind reading is not possible
24 There are actual cases of witchcraft.
25 It is possible to communicate with the dead.
26 Some people have an unexplained ability to predict the future.
Note: Item 23 is reversed for scoring.
Data and Methods
The purpose of this research is to consider the effectiveness of college courses in reducing belief in the paranormal and supernatural. These courses all had one or more of the following primary objectives: (1) to teach what science is, (2) to teach how to distinguish science from pseudoscience, and/or (3) how to think critically about new information. Our search criteria included peer-reviewed empirical studies that: (1) measured belief in the paranormal pre- and post-course content, (2) took place at a university or college within the United States, and (3) in most cases, also measured critical thinking pre- and postcourse content. One caveat to this last criterion is that although the critical thinking tests used were not the same across studies (e.g., Cornell Critical Thinking Test v. Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal) they were all administered for the same purpose (i.e., to measure critical thinking) and have been independently statistically validated by other empirical work.
Each of the courses utilized in these studies took a slightly different approach and placed a different degree of emphasis on various paranormal phenomena. For example, course titles included: “Parapsychology,” “Science & Pseudoscience,” “Paranormal Phenomena,” “Paranormal Statistics,” “Research Methods in Psychology,” and “Psychology of Critical Thinking.” Researchers from each study gave students a survey to measure their belief in the paranormal (e.g., using the Paranormal Belief Scale) before and after exposure to the course content. Although research exists on the relation between critical thinking and religious belief 8, we were more interested in how successful college level courses specifically designed to increase critical thinking were in decreasing belief in the paranormal (though “traditional religious beliefs” is one of seven subcategories measured in the Paranormal Belief Scale [PBS]9 that many researchers use).
We were able to collect statistics for only eight courses10 that measured the magnitude and direction of the change in paranormal belief. No other studies matched the search criteria listed above. Of the courses that did match, most had been taken by psychology undergraduates, and the studies contained significance tests to determine if paranormal belief scores changed in a statistically significant way after students were exposed to the course content. Basically they asked the question “Did the students’ general belief in paranormal phenomena decline?” In five out of those eight studies, critical thinking was also measured both pre- and postcourse.11 The significance tests in these studies answered the additional question: “Did the students’ critical thinking scores increase?” We were most interested to see if belief in the paranormal decreased along with an increase in critical thinking ability. With the few studies that met our criteria we conducted meta-analytic procedures that converted the significance tests to correlations between the pre- and post-scores. This allowed us to combine and contrast the studies as well as ascertain the strength of the relation between the preand post-change in scores.
Results
The first set of analyses explored whether or not these courses decreased students’ paranormal belief. The second set examined whether or not critical thinking scores increased.
First, the average effect size associated with a change in level of belief in paranormal phenomena pre- and post-course content was r=.67 which is very high, and statistically significant. The students’ purported belief in the paranormal declined significantly and substantially from the time they started the course to the time it ended. The reduction in paranormal belief was so significant that over 200 studies showing no such relationship would need to exist in order for these results to be statistically questionable.12 Therefore, it appears that these courses decrease purported belief, at least in the short term.
On the other hand, the average effect size associated with a change in critical thinking, as opposed to paranormal belief pre- and post-course content was r=.08. This tiny correlation wasn’t statistically significant—that is, this effect may well have shown up by mere chance. Taken together, we find that although students’ paranormal beliefs decline by the end of a course, their actual ability to think critically exhibits no corresponding increase. This suggests that they did not abandon paranormal beliefs because they became better critical thinkers.
It also suggests there may be other variables lurking here: tribal identity and social inclusion.
The Social Dimension of Critical Thinking
There are several reasons why students may report decreased levels of paranormal belief despite little or no increase in critical thinking. First, a caveat. It is possible that these students have actually employed their new critical thinking “toolkits” in the service of reducing paranormal beliefs, and that, for whatever reason, this increase simply wasn’t picked up in post-testing. However, this is highly unlikely to have occurred consistently across five studies. What more likely occurred is what we suggested above—a reduction in paranormal belief without any parallel increase in critical thinking ability.
Social Mechanisms
Why did paranormal beliefs decrease across these studies without an increase in critical thinking? We suggest three social mechanisms. First, the content of these courses might have raised more cognitive dissonance for some individuals than typical course content in psychology and philosophy. Calling upon students in an introductory course to question their “sacred” views on karma, astrology, spiritual healing and the like is probably more emotionally complicated than learning about Freud or Socrates. As a result, students may disengage from the course (consciously or not) and experience something akin to apathy. They may report a decrease in paranormal belief simply because they know this is what the course was designed to do. And they want to avoid the discomfort created by the introduction of conflicting new material— they just don’t want to think about it. While it seems desirable that they reported that their belief in the paranormal has declined that may be entirely motivated by apathy, due to a mildly uncomfortable social environment (in this case, the course and the classroom).
A second social mechanism might be fear of group exclusion. A classroom (or critical thinking “workshop”) is intrinsically hierarchical. In these instances, a leader (e.g., professor or organizer) disseminates knowledge about how to think to a group of students, who are expected to understand the information and internalize it as true. In this kind of social environment, hierarchies are rigid—there is a teacher and there are learners. In such a setting, self-reported beliefs may not be reliable if they simply reflect fear of reprisal or punishment for disagreeing with the views of the teacher and class. Fear of punishment or of ostracism may motivate students to report lower levels of paranormal belief at the end of the class. They may also be motivated by a powerful need for social inclusion, acceptance, and rewards—to “fit in” with a class that, it is assumed, tacitly endorses the professors’ views as the correct ones. Unlike the socially-induced apathy described above, fear of social exclusion may actually be sufficient to change the beliefs of students. Fear of reprisal or punishment may be enough to motivate genuine belief change. But such a belief change would be emotionally motivated, without the need for developing a critical thinking “toolbox.”
The third social mechanism is related to the second. In social environments with a rigid hierarchy (such as classrooms or workshops), students might report reduced beliefs in the paranormal simply due to an appeal to the authority of the hierarchy. That is, students might report lower levels of paranormal belief because they believe authority figures in general (i.g., professors) tend to be correct, whether or not the student understands the reasons for this (i.e., the professor’s supposed superior level of critical thinking). The appeal to authority is also a social environment mechanism because the professor is almost always the sole authority in the environment. If classrooms had two professors instead of one, and each had a different opinion about the validity of paranormal beliefs students might have responded differently. Again, it isn’t necessary that students learn to think critically in order to jettison supernatural beliefs. They could simply be responding to a generalized trust of authority figures.
If any one of the above mechanisms is operating in these classrooms or workshops, student belief in the paranormal will likely return to its original level as soon as they are removed from: (1) an environment that makes them apathetic, (2) an environment that ties critical thinking to social inclusion, or (3) an environment that contains an authority figure who promotes critical thinking about paranormal beliefs. Thus observed decreases in paranormal belief among students who take courses aimed at increasing critical thinking may be real in the short term, but not in the long term. Further study is required to understand how best to teach critical thinking that more permanently reduces belief in the paranormal and supernatural.
Anyone who knows me, knows of my own history with this stuff. You only have to look through my old posts to learn what I went through. I'm happy to say it is long behind me.
Check this out. It's worth your time.
Cancer: The Emperor of All Maladies
