Pseudosciences: who and how much believes in telepathy, contact with aliens, or that emotions cause cancer?

Are we well protected as a society from pseudoscientific hoaxes?

A couple of months ago, we conducted a survey that included a rate of acceptance of pseudoscientific beliefs developed by researcher and pseudoscientist Angelo Fache. launch pad Online from IMOP Insights (pending), we asked Spanish adults about their degree of agreement or disagreement with a list of allegations of hoax or pseudoscientific nonsense.

Claims can range from science confirming the existence of telepathic abilities or negative emotions “proven” to cause cancer, to archaeologists recording encounters between ancient civilizations and extraterrestrial beings.

Taken together, a higher average score on these beliefs usually means a greater willingness to accept hoaxes and pseudoscientific beliefs.

Basically the population accepts the possibility of pseudoscientific ideas

The survey data shows that in Spain today the typical response to pseudoscientific hoaxes is agnosticism: they are not accepted or rejected head-on, but instead ignorance is acknowledged. So the glass is half full?

There is reason to think twice that this is indeed the case. Not only do the majority of Spanish adults prove to be open to considering pseudoscientific ideas as plausible, but also, in some cases, a very high percentage of citizens outright hold such beliefs, as can be seen in detail in this graph. :

Going to University Doesn’t Mean Less Believing in Pseudoscience

How could it be that 30% of adults in Spain agree that telepathy is scientifically proven? Or that nearly a quarter of those surveyed say there is proven evidence of prehistoric contact with extraterrestrial civilizations?

In our study, we included the usual demographic variables (age, gender, level of education). We are relieved to see that educational attainment somewhat predicts less receptivity to pseudoscientific ideas. But despite the statistically significant association, the correlation between college graduation and adherence to pseudoscientific ideas was small. A reason for congratulations or, rather, for concern? After all, a few years of college education does not seem to protect against intellectual deceptions.

In contrast, age (belonging to an older generation) was about as predictive as education level: with the same level of education, older generations seem to be more likely to adopt these beliefs.

How can it be that university education, to which our society and our youth devote so much effort, is not a highly protective factor against pseudoscientific nonsense?

How much do we know about science?

In our study, we also included an indicator of citizens’ understanding of the nature of scientific knowledge. That is, we measure the extent to which adults living in Spain are familiar with the philosophy of scientific knowledge and the nature of science as an activity, including measuring whether people understand that the result can be scientific, even if it is not absolutely convincing, or if, for example people understand what peer review is.

High rates of familiarity with the philosophy of scientific knowledge were a clear predictor of the rejection of pseudoscientific hoaxes. In fact, in our model, university education protected against pseudoscientific hoaxes only when it served to convey at least some understanding of the philosophy of science.

Otherwise, college-educated people are no less or no more reluctant than others to accept pseudoscientific ideas.

This suggests that in Spain university education in many cases does not serve to convey a minimal philosophical understanding of the nature of science.

Risk factors

In our survey, being a woman also appeared to be a risk factor for adopting pseudoscientific beliefs. It’s even control over other variables. That is, with the same level of education or the same level of familiarity with the philosophy of science, women, on average, showed somewhat greater susceptibility. We do not know why this is so, and the proverbial “further study of this matter” applies here. However, since this result has been replicated in other surveys and may be of key importance in addressing situations of social vulnerability, we believe it is worth paying attention to the gender dimension in this matter.

As usual, these average differences are modest. This by no means means that one gender is more gullible than the other (in other surveys, men tend to be more likely to accept conspiracy theories, however absurd they may be).

One possibility noted above is that the greater empathy shown by women on average makes them more receptive. Another, more troubling possibility is that many of these beliefs were fabricated or (like a strain of a virus that adapts to its host) evolved to more easily recruit female adherents.

Other studies show, for example, that in our society receptivity to alternative therapies (especially a pernicious form of pseudoscience in some cases) is more common among women.

The path to a less trusting society

For several years now, our country has had an enviable system of surveillance and detection of an influenza epidemic in some respects. Similarly, COVID-19 has highlighted the need for early pathogen detection systems to prevent possible explosive outbreaks and timely action to contain their spread. The experience and results of some studies suggest that the need to identify, monitor and model the spread of pseudoscientific hoaxes among the population should be taken seriously.

Understanding what causes certain harmful ideas to spread and what makes some groups more vulnerable would strengthen our immunity to pseudoscience and its more harmful consequences.

A less trusting society is one that is less susceptible to misinformation and harmful practices and is more likely to make informed decisions about its health, the environment, and other important issues.

Hugo Vizziana, Research Professor at the University of Seville, Specialist in Philosophy and Cognitive Sciences, University of Seville and Aníbal M. Astobiza, Research Fellow in Cognitive Sciences and Applied Ethics, University of the Basque Country / Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original.

We recommend METADATA, the RPP technology podcast. News, analytics, reviews, recommendations and everything you need to know about the tech world.