Literature DB >> 27367591

The seductive allure is a reductive allure: People prefer scientific explanations that contain logically irrelevant reductive information.

Emily J Hopkins1, Deena Skolnick Weisberg2, Jordan C V Taylor2.   

Abstract

Previous work has found that people feel significantly more satisfied with explanations of psychological phenomena when those explanations contain neuroscience information-even when this information is entirely irrelevant to the logic of the explanations. This seductive allure effect was first demonstrated by Weisberg, Keil, Goodstein, Rawson, and Gray (2008), and has since been replicated several times (Fernandez-Duque, Evans, Christian, & Hodges, 2015; Minahan & Siedlecki, 2016; Rhodes, Rodriguez, & Shah, 2014; Weisberg, Taylor, & Hopkins, 2015). However, these studies only examined psychological phenomena. The current study thus investigated the generality of this effect and found that it occurs across several scientific disciplines whenever the explanations include reductive information: reference to smaller components or more fundamental processes. These data suggest that people have a general preference for reductive information, even when it is irrelevant to the logic of an explanation.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Decision making; Explanations; Seductive allure

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27367591     DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2016.06.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cognition        ISSN: 0010-0277


  9 in total

1.  Does Watching a Play about the Teenage Brain Affect Attitudes toward Young Offenders?

Authors:  Robert Blakey
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-06-09

2.  Concreteness and abstraction in everyday explanation.

Authors:  Christos Bechlivanidis; David A Lagnado; Jeffrey C Zemla; Steven Sloman
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2017-10

3.  People's explanatory preferences for scientific phenomena.

Authors:  Deena Skolnick Weisberg; Emily J Hopkins; Jordan C V Taylor
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2018-11-21

4.  Neuroscientific explanations and the stigma of mental disorder: a meta-analytic study.

Authors:  Amy Loughman; Nick Haslam
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2018-11-14

5.  Explanatory preferences for complexity matching.

Authors:  Jonathan B Lim; Daniel M Oppenheimer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-21       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Neuroscientific evidence in the courtroom: a review.

Authors:  Darby Aono; Gideon Yaffe; Hedy Kober
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2019-10-22

7.  When and why do people act on flawed science? Effects of anecdotes and prior beliefs on evidence-based decision-making.

Authors:  Audrey L Michal; Yiwen Zhong; Priti Shah
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2021-04-06

8.  Public misconceptions about dyslexia: The role of intuitive psychology.

Authors:  Iris Berent; Melanie Platt
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-12-02       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Integrating Philosophy of Understanding With the Cognitive Sciences.

Authors:  Kareem Khalifa; Farhan Islam; J P Gamboa; Daniel A Wilkenfeld; Daniel Kostić
Journal:  Front Syst Neurosci       Date:  2022-03-10
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.