tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca/topics/pseudoscience-4867/articlesPseudoscience – The Conversation2024-03-17T12:56:19Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2241192024-03-17T12:56:19Z2024-03-17T12:56:19ZOnline wellness content: 3 ways to tell evidence-based health information from pseudoscience<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582218/original/file-20240315-20-1ijga2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=374%2C66%2C6941%2C4649&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Health information is increasingly being shared online, and often the borders between legitimate health expertise and pseudoscience aren't clear.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>“I drink borax!” proclaims the smiling TikToker. Holding up a box of the laundry additive, she rhymes off a list of its supposed health benefits: “Balances testosterone and estrogen. It’s a powerhouse anti-inflammatory…. It’s amazing for arthritis, osteoporosis…. And obviously it’s great for your gut health.” </p>
<p>Videos like these <a href="https://globalnews.ca/news/9860780/borax-drinking-tiktok-trend/">prompted health authorities to warn the public</a> about the dangers of ingesting this toxic detergent — and away from such viral messaging that promotes unsubstantiated and medically dangerous health claims.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/a-new-tiktok-trend-has-people-drinking-toxic-borax-an-expert-explains-the-risks-and-how-to-read-product-labels-210278">A new TikTok trend has people drinking toxic borax. An expert explains the risks – and how to read product labels</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Health information is increasingly being shared online, and often the borders between legitimate health expertise and pseudoscience aren’t clear. While the internet can be a valuable and accessible way to learn about health, it’s also a place rife with disinformation and grift, as unscrupulous <a href="https://doi.org/10.1249/FIT.0000000000000829">influencers exploit</a> people’s fears about their bodies. </p>
<h2>Evidence and influencers</h2>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582219/original/file-20240315-24-myasst.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Collage of quotes about drinking borax" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582219/original/file-20240315-24-myasst.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582219/original/file-20240315-24-myasst.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582219/original/file-20240315-24-myasst.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582219/original/file-20240315-24-myasst.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582219/original/file-20240315-24-myasst.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582219/original/file-20240315-24-myasst.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/582219/original/file-20240315-24-myasst.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Some TikTokers claimed drinking borax had health benefits. In fact, borax is toxic and shouldn’t be ingested.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Michelle Cohen)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In my medical practice, I can usually track online wellness trends, such as a patient refusing a medication because of online claims — many of which are false — that it <a href="https://thefeelgoodagaininstitute.com/medications-that-lower-testosterone/">lowers testosterone</a>, or the several months when it seemed everyone was <a href="https://theconversation.com/turmeric-heres-how-it-actually-measures-up-to-health-claims-205613">taking turmeric</a> for joint pain, or the patients who request an <a href="https://theconversation.com/ivermectin-whether-formulated-for-humans-or-horses-is-not-a-treatment-for-covid-19-167340">ivermectin prescription</a> in case they catch COVID. </p>
<p>So how does someone who simply wants to learn more about the human body sift through the information? How to separate bad-faith grift from good advice? </p>
<p>Wellness influencers tap into a truth about how we process information: it’s <a href="https://lab.research.sickkids.ca/anthony/wp-content/uploads/sites/75/2019/07/Health-misinformation-and-the-power-of-narrative-messaging-in-the-public-sphere..pdf">more trustworthy</a> when it comes from a person we feel like we know. That’s why a charismatic personality’s Instagram account that uses <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783319846188">intimate stories</a> to promote <a href="https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/doctoral/4920/">parasocial attachment</a> — the sense of being part of a community — is more memorable than a website offering dry recitations of evidence.</p>
<p>But as social media has become ubiquitous, <a href="https://www.instagram.com/daniellebelardomd/?hl=en">health experts</a> have caught on that sharing their personal side alongside reliable advice can be a good use of their platform. At first glance, these two groups may seem similar, but the following tips can help determine if the person posting health advice is actually knowledgeable on the topic:</p>
<h2>1) Are they selling something?</h2>
<p>Rarely do popular wellness influencers post out of the goodness of their hearts. Almost invariably these accounts are <a href="https://www.conspirituality.net/transmissions/the-wellness-grift-of-jp-sears">trying to profit</a> from the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.20486">virality of their content</a>. </p>
<p>Whether it’s a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080%2F08998280.2022.2124767">supplement store</a>, a <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/social-media-weight-loss-diet-twitter-influencers-bloggers-glasgow-university-a8891971.html">diet book</a>, a subscription to a lifestyle community or a Masterclass series, the end goal is the same: transform social media influence into sales. Gushing over life-changing benefits from something the promoter is selling should always prompt skepticism. </p>
<p>Some legitimate health experts also sell advice, usually in the form of newsletters, books or <a href="https://www.bodyofevidence.ca/">podcasts</a>, and this is worth keeping in mind. However, there’s a big difference between selling a subscription to a <a href="https://vajenda.substack.com/">health newsletter</a> that discusses evidence and promoting your own supplement shop, where your financial motives shape how you present the information.</p>
<h2>2) What are the boundaries of their expertise?</h2>
<p>True expertise in a subject requires years of dedicated study and practice. That’s why people are rarely experts in more than one or two domains, and no one is a pan-expert on everything. </p>
<p>If a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2021.2006691">wellness influencer</a> promotes themselves as erudite on all health topics, that’s actually an excellent indication of their lack of knowledge. A real health expert knows the limitations of their knowledge and can call on others’ expertise when needed. So the podcast host who opines on every health issue is substantially less worthwhile to listen to than the podcast host who brings on guest experts for topics outside their scope. </p>
<h2>3) How do they talk about science?</h2>
<p>Science is a process of discovery, not a static philosophy, so scientists emphasize talking about current evidence rather than “truth”, which is more of a faith-based concept. </p>
<p>If someone wants to post about their personal wellness philosophy or their spiritual journey and how it makes them feel, that’s fine. But dropping in biology jargon without explanation or name-checking one or two questionable studies without fulsome discussion isn’t a meaningful way to engage with the evidence on a health topic. </p>
<p>Science-based information should acknowledge where data are uncertain and where more research is needed. Using the pretext of science to lend credence to a personal “truth” is a <a href="https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/critical-thinking-pseudoscience/whats-trending-world-pseudoscience">form of pseudoscience</a> and should raise red flags.</p>
<p>These three principles are a good framework for deciding whether an influencer’s health content is worth consuming or whether they’re simply trying to sell a new supplement or spread viral disinformation about something like borax. </p>
<p>As online health information becomes easier to find (or harder to avoid), this framework can help people quickly scan a wellness influencer’s profile and make a more informed decision about engaging with their content. This is an important type of media literacy that anyone spending time online should cultivate — for the sake of their health.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/224119/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Cohen does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>How do we distinguish between valuable information from legitimate health experts, and pseudoscientific nonsense from unscrupulous wellness influencers?Michelle Cohen, Adjunct Assistant Professor, Department of Family Medicine, Queen's University, OntarioLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2074262024-02-26T19:00:43Z2024-02-26T19:00:43ZThe Secret promises we can ‘manifest’ what we want. But if that’s true, why aren’t we all rich and famous?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/576648/original/file-20240220-26-k72tyz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C8%2C5991%2C3979&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mikhail Nilov/Pexel</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>Our cultural touchstones series looks at influential books.</em></p>
<p>Imagine you really wanted something and all you had to do was ask the universe and you would get it. That’d be awesome, right?! </p>
<p>I present this to my students in my first-year Research Methods in Psychology course, in the first session of the semester. Then I ask them what they think. </p>
<p>The first respondent is usually bright-eyed and bushy-tailed. They say something like: “Absolutely! You can achieve anything you want if you put your mind to it!” Emboldened, a handful of others express similar sentiments. Naturally, there are also sceptical students, but at this point it doesn’t suit my agenda to give them much oxygen. </p>
<p>Next, I tell the students I presume they’d all love to achieve High Distinctions in my course. I tell them it is, in fact, possible, and I’m going to share how it can be done. At this point, even the most sceptical students are intrigued. </p>
<p>I tell them all they need to know is … The Secret. </p>
<h2>A self-help megaseller</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/52529.The_Secret">The Secret</a> is a 2006 feature-length film and then book created by Australian Rhonda Byrne, who was a television executive when she came up with it. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/576699/original/file-20240220-20-t5u99s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/576699/original/file-20240220-20-t5u99s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/576699/original/file-20240220-20-t5u99s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=773&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576699/original/file-20240220-20-t5u99s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=773&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576699/original/file-20240220-20-t5u99s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=773&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576699/original/file-20240220-20-t5u99s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=972&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576699/original/file-20240220-20-t5u99s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=972&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/576699/original/file-20240220-20-t5u99s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=972&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The book has sold more than 35 million copies and been translated into more than 50 languages. Byrne has gone on to produce several related books, including The Greatest Secret, and associated merchandise, like a card deck. </p>
<p>It was even adapted as a romantic drama film, <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-secret-dare-to-dream-movie-review-2020">The Secret: Dare to Dream</a>, starring Katie Holmes and released in 2020. (<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/jul/30/the-secret-dare-to-dream-review-hokey-wish-fulfillment-soap">The Guardian described it</a> as “inoffensively middling […] with nothing of note other than a few laughably dumb moments”.)</p>
<p>Others have also got in on the act. For example, there’s a DVD titled <a href="https://www.amazon.com.au/Secret-Behind-Abraham/dp/B000O76WTW">The Secret Behind The Secret</a>, in which a self-help guru purports to channel a spiritual being called Benjamin. </p>
<p>The Secret’s fundamental claim is that a law of attraction operates within the universe: we become or attract what we think about most. In effect, positive things happen to positive people and negative things happen to negative people. Importantly, we are not passive recipients of our outcomes. Rather, we manifest our outcomes by actively thinking about them. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Mf3-oCDdTzQ?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The Secret: Dare to Dream, the 2020 adaptation starring Katie Holmes, was described as ‘inoffensively middling’.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Oprah Winfrey, who <a href="https://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1944527_1944528_1944309,00.html">lavishly embraced The Secret</a>, devoting two episodes of her talk show to it in 2006, said it embodied the message she’d been trying to share for 21 years: “you are responsible for your life”.</p>
<p>As others have pointed out, these ideas are not a secret and they’re not new. </p>
<p>The Secret is effectively a repackaging of the “power of positive thinking” <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-rise-of-pop-psychology-can-it-make-your-life-better-or-is-it-all-snake-oil-158709">pop psychology</a> from recent decades – and, centuries earlier, the quackery of the metaphysical movement. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-avoid-toxic-positivity-and-take-the-less-direct-route-to-happiness-170260">How to avoid 'toxic positivity' and take the less direct route to happiness</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Victim blaming</h2>
<p>Much <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0033-2909.131.6.803">empirical psychological research</a> suggests thinking and feeling positively is likely to be associated with more positive outcomes. </p>
<p>But there’s a stark gap between the blithe blanket statements of The Secret and the <a href="https://people.clas.ufl.edu/shepperd/files/moderators.pdf">empirical studies</a> that have tested the qualifications and nuances of the effects of positive expectations. </p>
<p>It’s in that gap where The Secret becomes an easy target.</p>
<p>For instance, The Secret is good news for anyone fortunate enough to be blessed with an eternally sunny disposition, but less so for anyone struggling with chronic depression. The Secret suggests depression and its consequences are the fault of the victim. If only they could think more positively! </p>
<p>Taken on face value, the principles espoused in The Secret should mean the end of poverty and war. Perhaps we’re not wishing hard enough? </p>
<p>Elsewhere, The Secret has <a href="https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-the-secret-law-of-attraction-considered-quantum-physics-do-you-support-it.397994/">offended physicists</a> with its misappropriation of quantum physics principles to explain the “law of attraction” (in itself a pseudoscientific idea). </p>
<p>And yet … people love this stuff. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-causes-depression-what-we-know-dont-know-and-suspect-81483">What causes depression? What we know, don’t know and suspect</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>An alluring fiction</h2>
<p>On Amazon, more than 40,000 customers have taken the time to review the book. The average rating is 4.6/5. Perhaps this should not be surprising. </p>
<p>The Secret (superficially) taps into a spiritual realm and research demonstrates that spirituality <a href="https://downloads.hindawi.com/archive/2012/278730.pdf">nurtures and comforts many</a>. The Secret speaks to a search for meaning and we know feeling a sense of purpose in life <a href="https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141">provides a measure of happiness</a>. The Secret proposes the individual has the power to control their own destiny – and research demonstrates the role a <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-4276-5_19">sense of personal control</a> has in people’s lives. </p>
<p>And The Secret encourages <a href="https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1348/026151004772901140">magical thinking</a>, which some people may be prone to more than they realise. The Secret promises the alluring fiction that – just for once – things in life might be easy. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vLZ_GXmUTOM?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The Chaser’s War on Everything questioned The Secret’s ability to deliver almost 15 years ago.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Back in the classroom, in <a href="https://theconversation.com/is-america-enduring-a-slow-civil-war-jeff-sharlet-visits-trump-rallies-a-celebrity-megachurch-and-the-manosphere-to-find-out-203948">this Trumpian age</a> where truth is in the eye of the beholder, The Secret reminds us the principles of the scientific method are still important when it comes to critically consuming information. </p>
<p>There are several ways of <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267098119_Conducting_Research_in_Psychology_Measuring_the_Weight_of_Smoke">knowing about the world</a>. We can defer to authority. We can rely on our intuition. We can employ logic. And we can make observations based on our experiences.</p>
<h2>Pseudo ‘experts’</h2>
<p>To some extent, Rhonda Byrne and her devotees leverage these knowledge sources to help give credence to The Secret. For example, it has been endorsed by high-profile influencers (like Winfrey) and prominent US personal development gurus (like <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MulLAfffQoQ">Bob Proctor</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_mJiImlcXQ">John Assaraf</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEgaSB7udDg">Jack Canfield</a>). Byrne claims eminent historical figures – including Plato, Shakespeare and Einstein – knew the secret and employed its principles. </p>
<p>All these people are experts, or at least present themselves as experts. So they must know what they’re talking about. As they’re authority figures, we intuit they can be trusted. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, it’s the equivalent of toothpaste advertisers dressing an actor in a white coat to imply they’re a scientist, who recommends a particular brand of toothpaste. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KYFIN6Csr0k?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Oprah Winfrey embraced The Secret, helping to make it a bestseller.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>To persuade you, The Secret takes you down the peripheral route, the one where you don’t put much effort into your research – “Einstein used it! There must be something to it!” – rather than the central route, where you think critically about claims. “Just because she says Einstein used it doesn’t make it valid. And how does she know he used it?”</p>
<p>The Secret appeals to intuition, by appropriating spiritual and scientific language. To the extent an individual believes in a spiritual dimension to this world, or that they can control their own destiny, The Secret speaks loudly. </p>
<p>On the other hand, anyone who thinks critically about its claims presumably finds themselves arriving at the maxim that if it sounds too good to be true, it is. </p>
<h2>Positive thinking plus effort</h2>
<p>Back in the lecture theatre, my students unpack the claims of The Secret. Quite reasonably, they suggest a whole bunch of important ingredients are needed in addition to “positive thinking”, if someone really is going to manifest their deepest desires. Things like hard work, perseverance, motivation, skill and ability.</p>
<p>The Secret is less able to appeal to logic, though it attempts to by referring to the pseudoscientific “law of attraction”. Again, the secret of The Secret’s success lies in the suggestibility of association. Referring to a “law” implies there is a scientific basis to the principles – and we all know science is logical, right? </p>
<p>A key component of the scientific method is that theories must be testable. Testing theories requires making observations – that is, collecting data. </p>
<p>If personal experience is one form of empirical evidence, then The Secret performs very impressively. There are thousands of testimonials on the internet from people around the world attesting to its ability to deliver results. </p>
<p>But dig a little deeper, and it’s clear this anecdotal evidence (“it happened to me, therefore it’s a thing”) almost always reflects the problem of the illusory correlation. Two events occur in close proximity to the other and rather than putting it down to coincidence, for example, people presume the first event caused the second. </p>
<p>This is even more likely to occur when an individual is <a href="https://www.donchristoff.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/nickerson1998.pdf">looking to confirm</a> – rather than test – their beliefs. </p>
<p>So, individuals wanting to see evidence The Secret works will find it. They ask the universe for a pay increase and two weeks later they get it. The possibility the pay increase was always on its way, due to their previous hard work and diligence, does not seem to be relevant. </p>
<p>Before my students leave, I wish them all the best for the course and their other university studies. I tell them I hope they all achieve the outcomes they desire. </p>
<p>And I remind them some of the principles embraced by The Secret do have some merit and are supported by empirical psychological research. Particularly, the idea that having a positive attitude tends to produce positive outcomes – though not always, and not because some magical connection with the universe made it so.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/207426/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Strelan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A psychology professor debunks Rhonda Byrne’s world-bestselling book and film – and her theory of personal success through a magical connection with the universe.Peter Strelan, Professor, School of Psychology, University of AdelaideLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2140742023-09-27T01:49:24Z2023-09-27T01:49:24ZNobody knows how consciousness works – but top researchers are fighting over which theories are really science<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/550467/original/file-20230926-23-njxkao.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C7%2C2596%2C1720&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/human-eye-detail-1196228368">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Science is hard. The science of consciousness is particularly hard, beset with philosophical difficulties and a scarcity of experimental data. </p>
<p>So in June, when the results of a head-to-head experimental contest between two rival theories were announced at the 26th annual meeting of the Association for the Scientific Study of Consciousness in New York City, they were met with some fanfare. </p>
<p>The results were inconclusive, with some favouring “integrated information theory” and others lending weight to the “global workspace theory”. The outcome was covered in both <a href="https://www.science.org/content/article/search-neural-basis-consciousness-yields-first-results">Science</a> and <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-02120-8">Nature</a>, as well as larger outlets including the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/01/science/consciousness-theories.html">New York Times</a> and <a href="https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2023/06/28/thousands-of-species-of-animals-likely-have-consciousness">The Economist</a>.</p>
<p>And that might have been that, with researchers continuing to investigate these and other theories of how our brains generate experience. But on September 16, apparently driven by media coverage of the June results, a group of 124 consciousness scientists and philosophers – many of them leading figures in the field – published an <a href="https://psyarxiv.com/zsr78/">open letter</a> attacking integrated information theory as “pseudoscience”.</p>
<p>The letter has generated an <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-02971-1">uproar</a>. The science of consciousness has its factions and quarrels but this development is unprecedented, and threatens to do lasting damage.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1703782006507589781"}"></div></p>
<h2>What is integrated information theory?</h2>
<p>Italian neuroscientist Giulio Tononi first <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2202-5-42">proposed</a> integrated information theory in 2004, and it is now on “<a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.14787">version 4.0</a>”. It is not easily summarised. </p>
<p>At its core is the idea that consciousness is identical to the amount of “integrated information” a system contains. Roughly, this means the information the system as a whole has over and above the information had by its parts. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-makes-us-conscious-50011">What makes us conscious?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Many theories start by looking for correlations between events in our minds and events in our brains. Instead, integrated information theory begins with “phenomenological axioms”, supposedly self-evident claims about the nature of consciousness. </p>
<p>Notoriously, the theory implies consciousness is extremely widespread in nature, and that even very simple systems, such as an inactive grid of computer circuitry, have some degree of consciousness. </p>
<h2>Three criticisms</h2>
<p>This open letter makes three main claims against integrated information theory. </p>
<p>First, it argues this is not a “leading theory of consciousness” and has received more media attention than it deserves. </p>
<p>Second, it <a href="https://psyarxiv.com/zsr78/">expresses concerns</a> about its implications:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If [integrated information theory] is either proven or perceived by the public as such, it will not only have a direct impact on clinical practice concerning coma patients, but also a wide array of ethical issues ranging from current debates on AI sentience and its regulation, to stem cell research, animal and organoid testing, and abortion.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The third claim has provoked the most outcry: integrated information theory is “pseudoscience”.</p>
<h2>Is integrated information theory a leading theory?</h2>
<p>Whether you agree with integrated information theory or not – and I myself have <a href="https://academic.oup.com/nc/article/2018/1/niy007/5047367">criticised</a> it – there is little doubt it is a “leading theory of consciousness”. </p>
<p>A <a href="https://academic.oup.com/nc/article/2022/1/niac011/6663928">survey</a> of consciousness scientists conducted in 2018 and 2019 found almost 50% of respondents said the theory was either probably or definitely “promising”. It was one of four theories featured in a keynote debate at the 2022 meeting of the Association for the Scientific Study of Consciousness, and was one of four theories featured in a <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41583-022-00587-4">review</a> of the state of consciousness science that Anil Seth and I published last year. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-021-01284-5">By one account</a>, integrated information theory is the third-most discussed theory of consciousness in the scientific literature, out-stripped only by global workspace theory and recurrent processing theory. Like it or not, integrated information theory has significant support in the scientific community.</p>
<h2>Is it more problematic than other theories?</h2>
<p>What about the potential implications of integrated information theory – its impact on clinical practice, the regulation of AI, and attitudes to stem cell research, animal and organoid testing, and abortion? </p>
<p>Consider the question of fetal consciousness. According to the <a href="https://psyarxiv.com/zsr78/">letter</a>, integrated information theory says “human fetuses at very early stages of development” are likely conscious. </p>
<p>The details matter here. I was the co-author of the <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811923002033">paper</a> cited in support of this claim, which in fact argues that no major theory of consciousness – integrated information theory included – posits the emergence of consciousness before 26 weeks gestation. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A colourful stylised line drawing of a brain" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/550324/original/file-20230926-19-pbmu01.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C17%2C3994%2C2389&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/550324/original/file-20230926-19-pbmu01.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=362&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550324/original/file-20230926-19-pbmu01.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=362&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550324/original/file-20230926-19-pbmu01.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=362&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550324/original/file-20230926-19-pbmu01.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=455&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550324/original/file-20230926-19-pbmu01.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=455&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/550324/original/file-20230926-19-pbmu01.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=455&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">All theories of consciousness inevitably have ethical and legal implications.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/vector-colorful-illustration-human-brain-synapses-1056342728">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>And while we should be mindful of the legal and ethical implications of integrated information theory, we should also be mindful of the implications of <em>all</em> theories of consciousness. </p>
<p>Are the implications of integrated information theory more problematic than those of other leading theories? That’s far from obvious, and there are certainly versions of other theories whose implications would be every bit as radical as those of integrated information theory. </p>
<h2>Is it pseudoscience?</h2>
<p>And so, finally, to the charge of pseudoscience. The letter provides no definition of “pseudoscience”, but suggests the theory is pseudoscientific because “the theory as a whole” is not empirically testable. It also claims integrated information theory wasn’t “meaningfully tested” by the head-to-head contest earlier this year.</p>
<p>It’s true the theory’s core tenets are very difficult to test, but so too are the core tenets of any theory of consciousness. To put a theory to the test one needs to assume a host of bridging principles, and the status of those principles will often be disputed. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/where-is-the-proof-in-pseudoscience-22184">Where is the proof in pseudoscience?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>But none of this justifies treating integrated information theory – or indeed any other theory of consciousness – as pseudoscience. All it takes for a theory to be genuinely scientific is that it generates testable predictions. And whatever its faults, the theory has certainly done that.</p>
<p>The charge of pseudoscience is not only inaccurate, it is also pernicious. In effect, it’s an attempt to “deplatform” or silence integrated information theory – to deny it deserves serious attention. </p>
<p>That’s not only unfair to integrated information theory and the scientific community at large, it also manifests a fundamental lack of faith in science. If the theory is indeed bankrupt, then the ordinary mechanisms of science will demonstrate as much.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/214074/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tim Bayne is affiliated with the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIFAR). </span></em></p>Big names in consciousness research have signed an open letter attacking ‘integrated information theory’ as pseudoscience, sparking uproar.Tim Bayne, Professor of Philosophy, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1969192023-01-24T13:22:32Z2023-01-24T13:22:32ZLots of people believe in Bigfoot and other pseudoscience claims – this course examines why<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505185/original/file-20230118-22-sxk00c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=11%2C0%2C1979%2C997&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Don't believe the hype about Bigfoot, a flat Earth or ancient aliens.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Collage from Getty Images sources</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="Text saying: Uncommon Courses, from The Conversation" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499014/original/file-20221205-17-kcwec8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499014/original/file-20221205-17-kcwec8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499014/original/file-20221205-17-kcwec8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499014/original/file-20221205-17-kcwec8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499014/original/file-20221205-17-kcwec8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499014/original/file-20221205-17-kcwec8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499014/original/file-20221205-17-kcwec8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/topics/uncommon-courses-130908">Uncommon Courses</a> is an occasional series from The Conversation U.S. highlighting unconventional approaches to teaching.</em> </p>
<h2>Title of course</h2>
<p>“Psychology of Pseudoscience”</p>
<h2>What prompted the idea for the course?</h2>
<p>While teaching a course on research methods at the United States Air Force Academy, I concluded that the course needed a bigger emphasis on broad scientific reasoning skills.</p>
<p>So I incorporated material about the difference between science – the <a href="https://sciencecouncil.org/about-science/our-definition-of-science/">systematic process of evidence-based inquiry</a> – and <a href="https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/P/bo15996988.html">pseudoscience</a>, which is the promotion of unreliable scientific claims as if they are more reliable than other explanations. </p>
<p>I wanted to understand why people promote claims that conflict with science. I jumped at the opportunity to develop this type of course at SUNY Cortland.</p>
<h2>What does the course explore?</h2>
<p>We look at some of the common scientific reasoning failures that pseudoscience exploits. These include <a href="https://aiptcomics.com/2021/02/01/stormtroopers-science-evidence-anecdotes/">hand-picking anecdotes</a> to support a belief, <a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pseudo-science/">developing a set of beliefs</a> that explain every possible outcome, <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/2017/05/vaccines-autism-and-the-promotion-of-irrelevant-research-a-science-pseudosc/">promoting irrelevant research</a>, <a href="https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/P/bo15996988.html">ignoring contradictory information</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614567356">believing in unsubstantiated conpiracies</a>.</p>
<p>We particularly highlight <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480">motivated reasoning</a>, the tendency for people to process information in a way that helps them confirm what they already want to believe. For example, someone might accept scientific consensus about cancer treatments but question it with regard to vaccines – even though both are supported by strong scientific evidence and expert consensus. </p>
<p>We also review <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.50.6.1141">group polarization</a>, in which people develop more extreme positions after interacting with similarly minded group members.</p>
<p>Some of the topics we examine include the <a href="https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/yes-flat-earthers-really-do-exist/">flat-Earth</a> belief, <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/denying-evolution-9780878936595?cc=us&lang=en&">creationism</a>, <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/2002/03/bigfoot-at-50-evaluating-a-half-century-of-bigfoot-evidence/">Bigfoot and other cryptozoology ideas</a>, <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/2022/02/the-great-australian-psychic-prediction-project-pondering-the-published-predictions-of-prominent-psychics/">psychic ability</a>, <a href="https://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/therapeutic-response.pdf">conversion therapy</a>, <a href="http://cup.columbia.edu/book/vaccines-and-your-child/9780231153072">anti-vaccination</a>, <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/318419a0">astrology</a>, <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/2003/01/amityville-the-horror-of-it-all/">ghosts</a> and <a href="http://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-madhouse-effect/9780231177863">climate change denial</a>.</p>
<p>Students complete two papers to reinforce their knowledge. First, students develop their own bogus scientific claims and a corresponding plan to convince people that their claims are legitimate. Allowing students to invent and promote novel forms of pseudoscience gives them a safe context in which to examine specious scientific arguments.</p>
<p>Second, students review old issues of <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/">Skeptical Inquirer</a>, the leading national magazine about science and critical thinking, to summarize the topics that were being addressed at that time. Students also dive more deeply into a specific topic like unexplained cattle mutilations or the Bermuda Triangle. Then they write a paper based on an <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/2022/12/on-the-origin-of-skeptical-inquirer/">example I recently published</a> in Skeptical Inquirer. I’m hopeful that future column installments will include students’ work.</p>
<h2>Why is this course relevant now?</h2>
<p>The internet has provided pseudoscience communities with the unprecedented ability to promote their false claims.</p>
<p>For instance, flat-Earthers have <a href="https://theconversation.com/i-watched-hundreds-of-flat-earth-videos-to-learn-how-conspiracy-theories-spread-and-what-it-could-mean-for-fighting-disinformation-184589">relied on YouTube</a> to create doubt about Earth as a globe. The Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization uses Facebook to support Bigfoot belief. These platforms take advantage of people’s tendency to believe material posted by their <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2011.620764">friends</a> or <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-011-9219-6">authoritative-sounding sources</a>.</p>
<p>This course is also relevant now because the consequences of poor scientific reasoning are so significant. People who believe these sorts of false claims risk their own health and that of the planet, by <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-17430-6">avoiding helpful, safe vaccines</a> or <a href="http://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-madhouse-effect/9780231177863">useful discussions about the problems presented by climate change</a>.</p>
<h2>What’s a critical lesson from the course?</h2>
<p>It’s important for students to understand that <a href="https://centerforinquiry.org/video/why-were-all-susceptible-to-pseudoscience-craig-foster/">reasonable, intelligent people promote pseudoscience</a>. When people encounter pseudoscience they don’t personally believe, they sometimes conclude that the pseudoscience supporters are unintelligent or mentally unwell. This type of explanation is shortsighted. </p>
<p>Everyday people are drawn into believing pseudoscience because they have limited cognitive resources and they use cognitive strategies, like relying on anecdotes, that can lead to erroneous belief. Human scientific reasoning is particularly flawed when humans really <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/44085270">want to reach a particular conclusion</a>.</p>
<p>Belief in pseudoscience also develops out of social interactions. Friends and family members commonly share their reasons for believing in creationism, ghosts, fad diets and so forth. This type of social influence goes into overdrive when people <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302211050323">join communities that collectively promote pseudoscience</a>. I have attended Bigfoot and flat-Earth conferences. These conferences create powerful social experiences, because so many friendly people are available to explain that Bigfoot is alive or the Earth is flat, both of which are, clearly, false.</p>
<h2>What materials does the course feature?</h2>
<p>The “Defining Pseudoscience and Science” chapter by Sven Ove Hansson in “<a href="https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/P/bo15996988.html">Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem</a>” sets up what I call the psychological puzzle of pseudoscience: How do people convince themselves and others that an unreliable scientific claim is actually reliable?</p>
<p>We also have guest speakers, including philosophy of science scholar <a href="https://massimopigliucci.org/">Massimo Pigliucci</a>, journalist and folklorist <a href="http://benjaminradford.com/">Ben Radford</a>, exposer of psychics <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive/susan-gerbic-back-on-tour/">Susan Gerbic</a>, a local Bigfoot enthusiast, and Janyce Boynton, who discussed <a href="https://www.facilitatedcommunication.org">facilitated communication</a>, a discredited communication technique in which some people physically assist nonverbal people with their communication, for example, by guiding their hands as they type.</p>
<h2>What will the course prepare students to do?</h2>
<p>The course prepares students to identify dubious scientific claims. In so doing, they should <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-018-9513-3">become less vulnerable</a> to being drawn into pseudoscience. The course also enhances familiarity with specific forms of pseudoscience. I expect climate change denial, anti-vaccination and creationism to remain major points of contention in American society for decades. Educated people should understand the discussions that occur around these kind of social problems.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/196919/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Craig Foster is affiliated with facilitatedcommunication.org.
Anything else to declare: I am a Committee for Skeptical Inquiry Fellow.</span></em></p>A university course teaches students why people believe false and evidence-starved claims, to show them how to determine what’s accurate and real and what’s neither.Craig A. Foster, Professor and Chair, Department of Psychology, State University of New York CortlandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1975792023-01-12T17:18:03Z2023-01-12T17:18:03ZLike Prince Harry a quarter of British people have consulted a psychic – here’s the science on why<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/504013/original/file-20230111-25-ebea6f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=98%2C53%2C5892%2C3314&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/magical-luminous-swirling-glowing-ball-palm-1658385709">Shutterstock/goffkein.pro</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Extracts from Prince Harry’s recently published memoir, Spare, reveal that he used <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11603541/Prince-Harry-contacted-psychic-reach-late-mother-Diana.html">a person with supposed psychic abilities</a> to contact his deceased mother, Diana, Princess of Wales. Diana was tragically killed in a car crash in Paris in 1997 when Harry was 12 years old. </p>
<p>The woman with undisclosed powers was recommended by a trusted friend. While Harry “recognised there was a high-percentage chance of humbuggery” associated with paranormal claims, when he met the women he reported “<a href="https://www.elle.com/uk/life-and-culture/culture/a42414998/prince-harry-woman-powers-message-princess-diana/">feeling an energy</a>”. Subsequently she relayed messages from Diana to him. </p>
<p>She told him that <a href="https://www.elle.com/uk/life-and-culture/culture/a42414998/prince-harry-woman-powers-message-princess-diana/">Diana was currently with him</a> and aware that he was confused and seeking clarity. Additionally, she knew he had several questions and that answers would emerge over time. Harry was also told that his mother had witnessed and was amused by his son, Archie, breaking a Christmas tree ornament in the shape of his grandmother, the Queen. </p>
<p>People with supposed paranormal powers such as those described by Prince Harry are typically referred to as psychics, mediums, or clairvoyants. Although the terms are often used synonymously, they have <a href="https://apnews.com/article/archive-9390228c3292452da78fd0f67aba261b">different meanings</a>. </p>
<p>Psychics are said to obtain information about people or events by connecting with “souls”. Mediums believe they can transmit and receive information from the deceased. Clairvoyants say they can see and sense things using their minds. Hence, all mediums are psychics but not all psychics are mediums. </p>
<p>Nonetheless, psychic claims have a <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-science-of-why-so-many-people-believe-in-psychic-powers-102088">dreadful reputation</a> and are typically denounced by wider society. This is due to infamous instances of fakery and the lack of support from <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/26/magazine/psychics-skeptics-facebook.html">objective science</a>.</p>
<p>Despite this, many people still continue to use them and a large proportion of the public – <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/16915/three-four-americans-believe-paranormal.aspx">over a quarter</a> according to a Gallup survey in the US – believe that humans have psychic abilities. </p>
<p>Indeed, <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-20145664">research</a> estimates that around 10% of the UK adult population regularly visits a medium. <a href="http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/2011-10-05/YG-Archives-Psychics-051011.pdf">A 2011 poll from YouGov</a> found around a quarter of British people have consulted a psychic, and well over half of these people believed they were truthful.</p>
<h2>Famous fakes?</h2>
<p>Notable historical cases of proven fraud include <a href="https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/53424/houdinis-greatest-trick-debunking-medium-mina-crandon">Mina Crandon</a>, (1888 to 1941) a psychic medium who claimed to channel her dead brother, Walter Stinson. Investigations revealed she had no paranormal powers and engaged in deception. She even tried to trick famed magician Harry Houdini but didn’t get away with it as Houdini foiled her plans. </p>
<p>Henry Slade was another notable fraudulent medium. He was repeatedly caught faking spirit messages in seances. He would place a small slate with a piece of chalk under the table and claimed spirits would use it to write messages. He produced his phenomena through a variety of magic tricks and by <a href="https://archive.org/details/behindsceneswit04abbogoog/page/n203/mode/2up?view=theater&q=slade">writing with his toes</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/504007/original/file-20230111-26-pkf525.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="The funeral of Diana, Princess of Wales in black and white." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/504007/original/file-20230111-26-pkf525.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/504007/original/file-20230111-26-pkf525.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/504007/original/file-20230111-26-pkf525.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/504007/original/file-20230111-26-pkf525.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/504007/original/file-20230111-26-pkf525.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/504007/original/file-20230111-26-pkf525.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/504007/original/file-20230111-26-pkf525.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The funeral of Diana, Princess of Wales. Walking behind the coffin are Prince Charles, Princes William and Harry and Earl Charles Spencer.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/london-uk-6th-september-1997-editorial-357011507">Shutterstock/John Gomez</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But not all mediums and psychics deliberately set out to deceive people. An illustration of this is <a href="https://derekogilvie.com/">Derek Ogilvie</a>, who appears to genuinely believe he can <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2006/jun/19/familyandrelationships.tvandradio">telepathically communicate</a> with young infants. </p>
<p>In the 2007 Channel 5 TV documentary, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt13326918/">Extraordinary People: The Million Dollar Mind Reader</a>, Ogilvie <a href="https://cosmolearning.org/documentaries/extraordinary-people-the-million-dollar-mind-reader-1674/">failed to demonstrate</a> his abilities to the satisfaction of scientific experts. But the programme concluded that he was misguided rather than insincere. Ogilvie argued that he could only report what the baby was telepathically projecting and could not offer information on the parents, as one of the experiments requested.</p>
<p>The failure to <a href="https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/news/features/debunking-psychic-abilities">demonstrate paranormal abilities</a> in stringent, controlled conditions is well documented. For instance, <a href="https://web.randi.org/">James Randi</a>, an investigator and demystifier of paranormal and pseudoscientific claims, offered a prize of US$1 million (£820,000) to anyone, who could demonstrate a supernatural or paranormal ability under predetermined scientific testing criteria. Although the challenge ran between 1964 and 2015, no one was able to claim the money. </p>
<h2>Why people visit mediums</h2>
<p>Given such cases and the lack of scientific support, why then do people such as Prince Harry turn to people with <a href="https://www.vogue.com/article/why-do-people-become-addicted-to-psychics">supposed paranormal powers</a>?</p>
<p>Bereavement, also known as the <a href="https://theconversation.com/whats-the-point-of-grief-137665">grief response</a>, is a life crisis that can negatively affect individual physical and psychological well-being. In this context, attempting after-death communication provides a continued bond between the living and the departed. Regardless of whether it is imagined, this can afford comfort and prove beneficial. </p>
<p><a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1995-35813-001">Research suggests</a> that people with stronger levels of belief in life after death will place greater faith and emphasis on the communications they receive from psychics.</p>
<p>Specifically, psychic contact enables the griever to work through and resolve issues or conflicts with the deceased. This allows relationships to transcend death and sustain the living.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/504008/original/file-20230111-14-pkf525.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/504008/original/file-20230111-14-pkf525.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/504008/original/file-20230111-14-pkf525.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/504008/original/file-20230111-14-pkf525.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/504008/original/file-20230111-14-pkf525.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/504008/original/file-20230111-14-pkf525.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/504008/original/file-20230111-14-pkf525.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/504008/original/file-20230111-14-pkf525.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Many psychics use tarot cards for readings.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.pexels.com/photo/healthy-fashion-man-love-6944688/">Pexels/Mikhail Nilov</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The notion of communicating with a deceased loved one for many people also affords hope. It’s more palatable than the definite, perception of the end of life. It also allows the individual to re-frame their experiences and move on. </p>
<p>However, there are <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4394851/">reports</a> of some people <a href="https://www.vogue.com/article/why-do-people-become-addicted-to-psychics">getting addicted</a> to psychic readings.</p>
<p>Attempts to contact departed loved ones fulfils the need to attempt to comprehend the unknown and make sense of our own existence. Explicitly, it can help to address anxieties arising from awareness of one’s own mortality. Visiting a medium also allows individuals to <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/mishagajewski/2021/01/17/heres-why-some-people-say-they-hear-dead-people/?sh=14e90321439a">explore and experience wider aspects</a> of human existence. </p>
<p>Whatever the reasons, psychics, mediums and clairvoyants have been around for thousands of years and continue to be popular despite the lack of scientific evidence. Given the psychological need they appear to fulfil, it’s possible people will still be visiting them in another thousand years.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/197579/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>How Prince Harry using a psychic to contact his dead mother, Princess Diana, isn’t that unusual.Ken Drinkwater, Senior Lecturer and Researcher in Cognitive and Parapsychology, Manchester Metropolitan UniversityNeil Dagnall, Reader in Applied Cognitive Psychology, Manchester Metropolitan UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1914772022-10-21T12:38:29Z2022-10-21T12:38:29ZWhy is 13 considered unlucky? Explaining the power of its bad reputation<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/490737/original/file-20221019-20-g6fx2h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=44%2C0%2C2072%2C1414&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Many elevators do not have a floor numbered 13 because of common superstitions about the number.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/close-up-of-a-businessman-using-hotel-elevator-royalty-free-image/1401402377?phrase=elevator&adppopup=true">Luis Alvarez/DigitalVision via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Would you think it weird if I refused to travel on Sundays that fall on the 22nd day of the month?</p>
<p>How about if I lobbied the homeowner association in my high-rise condo to skip the 22nd floor, jumping from the 21st to 23rd?</p>
<p>It’s highly unusual <a href="https://theconversation.com/happy-twosday-why-numbers-like-2-22-22-have-been-too-fascinating-for-over-2-000-years-176093">to fear 22</a> – so, yes, it would be appropriate to see me as a bit odd. But what if, in just my country alone, more than 40 million people shared the same baseless aversion?</p>
<p>That’s <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/26887/thirteen-percent-americans-bothered-stay-hotels-13th-floor.aspx">how many Americans</a> admit it would bother them to stay on one particular floor in high-rise hotels: the 13th.</p>
<p>According to the Otis Elevator Co., for every building with a floor numbered “13,” six other buildings <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20130430013751/http:/realtytimes.com/rtpages/20020913_13thfloor.htm">pretend to not have one</a>, skipping right to 14.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.postandcourier.com/kingstree/community-news/some-scared-others-amused-by-friday-the-13th/article_50e1a1d2-cd6b-11ec-9c50-3b6b3897ea36.html">Many Westerners</a> <a href="https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-friday-the-13th-affects-peoples-behaviour">alter their behaviors</a> on <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1697765/pdf/bmj00052-0013.pdf">Friday the 13th</a>. Of course bad things <a href="https://www.readersdigest.ca/culture/friday-the-13th-history/">do sometimes happen</a> on that date, but there’s no evidence they do so disproportionately.</p>
<p>As <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ZEQu09wAAAAJ&hl=en">a sociologist</a> specializing in social psychology and group processes, I’m not so interested in individual fears and obsessions. What fascinates me is when millions of people share the same misconception to the extent that it affects behavior on a broad scale. Such is the power of 13. </p>
<h2>Origins of the superstition</h2>
<p>The source of 13’s bad reputation – “triskaidekaphobia” – is murky and speculative. The historical explanation may be as simple as its chance juxtaposition with lucky 12. <a href="https://centerforinquiry.org/blog/authors/nickell-joe/">Joe Nickell</a> investigates paranormal claims for the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, a nonprofit that scientifically examines controversial and extraordinary claims. He points out that 12 often <a href="https://centerforinquiry.org/press_releases/freaking_out_over_friday_the_13th_skeptics_say_relax/">represents “completeness”</a>: the number of months in the year, gods on Olympus, signs of the zodiac and apostles of Jesus. Thirteen contrasts with this sense of goodness and perfection. </p>
<p>The number 13 may be associated with some <a href="https://www.livescience.com/46284-origins-unlucky-friday-the-13th.html">famous but undesirable dinner guests</a>. In Norse mythology, the god Loki was 13th to arrive at a feast in Valhalla, where he tricked another attendee into killing the god Baldur. In Christianity, Judas – the apostle who betrayed Jesus – was the 13th guest at the Last Supper. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A painting shows thirteen men seated on one side of a long table, wearing colored robes." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/490678/original/file-20221019-22-4f7v7k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/490678/original/file-20221019-22-4f7v7k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=303&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/490678/original/file-20221019-22-4f7v7k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=303&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/490678/original/file-20221019-22-4f7v7k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=303&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/490678/original/file-20221019-22-4f7v7k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=381&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/490678/original/file-20221019-22-4f7v7k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=381&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/490678/original/file-20221019-22-4f7v7k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=381&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">‘The Last Supper,’ a 15th-century mural painting in Milan created by Leonardo da Vinci.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/the-last-supper-15th-century-mural-painting-in-milan-news-photo/113493718?phrase=last%20supper%20da%20vinci&adppopup=true">Universal History Archive/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But the truth is, sociocultural processes can associate bad luck with any number. When the conditions are favorable, <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-62585-9#:%7E:text=In%20addition%2C%20rumor%20spreading%20is,social%20environments%20in%20rumor%20spreading.">a rumor</a> or superstition generates its own social reality, snowballing like an urban legend as it rolls down the hill of time. </p>
<p>In Japan, <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/article/130913-friday-luck-lucky-superstition-13">9 is unlucky</a>, probably because it sounds similar to the Japanese word for “suffering.” <a href="https://www.thelocal.it/20200717/thirteen-of-italys-strangest-superstitions-bad-luck-fate-belief-traditions/">In Italy</a>, it’s 17. In China, 4 sounds like “death” and is more actively avoided in everyday life than 13 is in Western culture – including a willingness to <a href="https://doi.org/10.5204/mcj.2604">pay higher fees </a> to avoid it in cellphone numbers. And though 666 is considered lucky in China, many Christians around the world associate it with an evil beast described in the biblical Book of Revelation. There is even a word for an intense fear of 666: <a href="https://www.verywellmind.com/hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia-2671858">hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia</a>.</p>
<h2>Social and psychological explanations</h2>
<p>There are <a href="https://www.verywellmind.com/list-of-phobias-2795453">many kinds</a> of specific <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519704/table/ch3.t11/">phobias</a>, and people hold them for a variety of psychological reasons. They can arise from direct negative experiences – fearing bees after being stung by one, for example. Other <a href="https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/specific-phobias/symptoms-causes/syc-20355156#:%7E:text=Many%20phobias%20develop%20as%20a,to%20genetics%20or%20learned%20behavior.">risk factors</a> for developing a phobia include being very young, having relatives with phobias, having a more sensitive personality and being exposed to others with phobias.</p>
<p>Part of 13’s reputation may be connected to a feeling of unfamiliarity, or “<a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0247037#sec008">felt sense of anomaly</a>,” as it is called in the psychological literature. In everyday life, 13 is less common than 12. There’s no 13th month, 13-inch ruler, or 13 o'clock. By itself a sense of unfamiliarity won’t cause a phobia, but <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8721.00154">psychological research</a> shows that we favor what is familiar and disfavor what is not. This makes it easier to associate 13 with negative attributes.</p>
<p>People also may assign dark attributes to 13 for the same reason that many believe in “full moon effects.” Beliefs that the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.051119">full moon</a> influences mental health, crime rates, accidents and other human calamities have been thoroughly debunked. Still, when people are looking to <a href="http://www.sakkyndig.com/psykologi/artvit/nickerson1998.pdf">confirm their beliefs</a>, they are prone to infer connections between unrelated factors. For example, having a car accident during a full moon, or on a Friday the 13th, makes the event seem all the more memorable and significant. Once locked in, such beliefs are <a href="https://sk.sagepub.com/reference/socialpsychology/n62.xml#:%7E:text=Belief%20perseverance%20is%20the%20tendency,the%20basis%20of%20that%20belief.">very hard to shake</a>.</p>
<p>Then there are the potent effects of social influences. It takes a village – or Twitter – to make fears coalesce around a particular harmless number. The emergence of any superstition in a social group – fear of 13, walking under ladders, not stepping on a crack, knocking on wood, etc. – is not unlike the rise of a “<a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Selfish_Gene/ekonDAAAQBAJ?hl=en">meme</a>.” Although now the term most often refers to widely shared online images, it was <a href="https://www.wired.co.uk/article/richard-dawkins-memes">first introduced</a> by biologist <a href="https://richarddawkins.net/">Richard Dawkins</a> to help describe how an idea, innovation, fashion or other bit of information can diffuse through a population. A meme, in his definition, is similar to a piece of genetic code: It reproduces itself as it is communicated among people, with the potential to mutate into alternative versions of itself. </p>
<p>The 13 meme is a simple bit of information associated with bad luck. It resonates with people for reasons given above, and then spreads throughout the culture. Once acquired, this piece of pseudo-knowledge gives believers a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000225">sense of control</a> over the evils associated with it.</p>
<h2>False beliefs, true consequences</h2>
<p>Groups concerned with public relations seem to feel the need to kowtow to popular superstitions. Perhaps owing to the near-tragic <a href="https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/missions/apollo13.html">Apollo 13 mission</a>, NASA stopped sequentially numbering space shuttle missions, dubbing <a href="https://www.nasa.gov/feature/behind-the-space-shuttle-mission-numbering-system">the 13th shuttle flight</a> STS-41-G. In Belgium, complaints from superstitious passengers led Brussels Airlines to revamp <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/21/business/worldbusiness/21iht-logo.4676788.html">its logo</a> in 2006. It had been a “b”-like image made of 13 dots. The airline added a 14th. Like many other airlines, its planes’ row numbering <a href="https://simpleflying.com/row-13-on-planes/#:%7E:text=There%20is%20a%20long%2Dheld,based%20on%20a%20superstitious%20belief.">skips 13</a>.</p>
<p>Because superstitious beliefs are inherently false, they are as likely to do harm as good – consider <a href="https://quackwatch.org/">health frauds</a>, for example. I’d like to believe influential organizations – perhaps even elevator companies – would do better to warn the public about the dangers of clinging to false beliefs than to continue legitimizing them.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/191477/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Barry Markovsky does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A sociologist unpacks how common superstitions like fear of 13 can gain steam.Barry Markovsky, Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Sociology, University of South CarolinaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1839052022-06-03T12:16:23Z2022-06-03T12:16:23ZCan Bionic Reading make you a speed reader? Not so fast<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/466634/original/file-20220601-49081-ugrudd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C20%2C6720%2C4446&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">In an age of distraction, the desire to read faster and more efficiently is understandable. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/no-one-is-safe-royalty-free-image/1291463895">eclipse_images/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>What if something as simple as bolding parts of a word could make reading a breeze, improving your focus, speed and comprehension?</p>
<p>That’s the claim made by the creators of <a href="https://bionic-reading.com">Bionic Reading</a>, an app that revises texts so that the most concise parts of the words are “highlighted.” </p>
<p>Doing so, according to the makers of the app, directs the eyes to focus on the important parts of the text. Because “your brain reads faster than your eye,” this allows users to read more quickly and efficiently.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1529067758914256898"}"></div></p>
<p>Early adopters have raved about the app on social media – <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9_KaVksCPU">including some users with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and dyslexia</a>. But <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=8pomrUYAAAAJ&hl=en">as an educational psychologist</a> who researches reading in print and digital mediums, I think the hype is overblown – if not misleading.</p>
<h2>Shaky claims</h2>
<p>On the <a href="https://bionic-reading.com">Bionic Reading website</a>, the inventor, a typographer named Renato Casutt, explains that Bionic Reading was tested independently using 12 participants. He adds that it wasn’t explicitly tested on people with dyslexia.</p>
<p>He then goes on to write that “the results are unclear.” From there, Casutt says Bionic Reading had a positive effect for most participants, but that others found it “disturbing.” </p>
<p>These tests don’t adhere to standard scientific practices. A sample size of 12 is extraordinary small, and it is highly unlikely it would make it past an editor’s desk for peer review at a reputable journal. Casutt doesn’t tell readers what the “positive effect” refers to. Was it reading time? Comprehension? Enjoyment?</p>
<p>The Conversation reached out to Bionic Reading for more clarity and to better understand its methodology. The company did not respond.</p>
<p>The company website’s assertion that the “brain reads faster than the eye” is also deeply flawed. Perhaps it’s a reference to <a href="https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Orthographic-Mapping-in-the-Acquisition-of-Sight-Ehri/156bd9fa294573538a19dc2ef4bd19bdae9cf418">sight words</a>: When someone learns how to read, they normally have many words that they can make sense of via simple recognition, rather than by breaking down the word into individual syllables or sounds. These sight words often appear at a higher frequency in texts at all reading levels. </p>
<p>Either way, what makes reading “slow” is not due to an inability to quickly perceive the words themselves – which is what Bionic Reading claims to fix. Instead, reading takes the time it does <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100615623267">due to language processing</a>, which is where our brains turn strings of letters into words and a series of words into meaning.</p>
<p>So no matter how quickly you recognize certain words, your brain still has to do the work to understand the sentence. </p>
<h2>Speed at a cost</h2>
<p>This isn’t the first time someone has tried to introduce ways to read text more quickly. In fact, educators <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/1000838">used to teach speed reading in the 1980s</a>. However, that method faded from curriculums as <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1529100615623267">research showed that faster isn’t always better</a> – nor do the techniques even lead to faster reading in most cases.</p>
<p>Bionic Reading may even hinder readers. Consider the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(77)90012-9">speed-accuracy trade-off</a>, which theorizes that the more quickly one does something, the worse their performance.</p>
<p>My colleagues and I tested this theory for reading comprehension across print and digital mediums. We found, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2017.1411877">time</a> after <a href="https://drum.lib.umd.edu/handle/1903/24981">time</a>, whether in print or on a screen, the faster someone read a text, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.04.001">the less likely they were to comprehend it</a>.</p>
<p>When people read quickly, <a href="https://drum.lib.umd.edu/handle/1903/24981">they interact with the text on a more superficial level</a>, often skipping over entire sentences or paragraphs and failing to reread important parts of the text. </p>
<h2>Tried and true techniques</h2>
<p>To help struggling readers, especially those with dyslexia and ADHD, research suggests that one of the most helpful tools can be to simply encourage reading more slowly.</p>
<p>This is the antithesis of Bionic Reading’s argument. However, unlike Bionic Reading, the “read more slowly” school of thought <a href="https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=suc1o0hueowC&oi=fnd&pg=PA91&dq=slow+down+reading+for+dyslexia&ots=j9deteB8pJ&sig=0IRQ0YYJ7nou5U4PhOmmd8Oc9W8#v=onepage&q=slow%20down%20reading%20for%20dyslexia&f=false">has decades of research</a> supporting it.</p>
<p>Other simple steps, such as <a href="https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=XZvzCwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA7&dq=follow+along+as+you+read+for+comprehension&ots=1GHql5fO44&sig=DKWLKk9lwWbjx3bWyTsm5lcRK54#v=onepage&q=follow%20along%20as%20you%20read%20for%20comprehension&f=false">following along with your finger or computer mouse</a>, can be helpful for those with reading difficulties, too. </p>
<p>I can understand the allure of Bionic Reading. Information bombards us. Sources of distraction are rampant. But <a href="https://hechingerreport.org/americas-reading-problem-scores-were-dropping-even-before-the-pandemic/">reading proficiency scores were dropping to new lows</a> even before the pandemic. Now is not the time to be valuing speed at the cost of comprehension.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/183905/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lauren M. Singer Trakhman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The claims made by the creators of the app – which highlights parts of words to supposedly enhance users’ reading abilities – are dubious.Lauren M. Singer Trakhman, Assistant Clinical Professor of Human Development, University of MarylandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1760932022-02-17T15:10:12Z2022-02-17T15:10:12ZHappy Twosday! Why numbers like 2/22/22 have been too fascinating for over 2,000 years<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/446389/original/file-20220214-25-kswfz8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=20%2C0%2C2180%2C1325&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Is "Twosday" as special as some corners of the internet seem to think?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">articular/iStock via Getty Images Plus</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>This Feb. 22, the world hits an unprecedented milestone. It’s the date itself: 2/22/22. And this so-called “Twosday” falls on a Tuesday, no less. </p>
<p>It’s true the number pattern stands out, impossible to miss. But does it mean anything? Judging by the thousands of commemorative products available for purchase online, it may appear to.</p>
<p>“Twosday” carries absolutely no historical significance or any cosmic message. Yet it does speak volumes about our brains and cultures.</p>
<p><a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ZEQu09wAAAAJ&hl=en">I’m a social psychologist</a> who studies how <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1525/sop.2001.44.1.21">paranormal claims and pseudoscience</a> take hold as popular beliefs. They’re nearly always absurd from a scientific perspective, but they’re great for illustrating how brains, people, groups and cultures work together to create shared meaning.</p>
<h2>Seeing patterns</h2>
<p>Twosday isn’t the only date with a striking pattern. This century alone has had a couple Onesdays (1/11/11 and 11/11/11), and 11 other months with repetitions such as 01/01/01, 06/06/06 and 12/12/12. We’ll hit Threesday, 3/3/33, in 11 years, and Foursday 11 years after that.</p>
<p>The brain has <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-adapted-mind-9780195101072?q=tooby&lang=en&cc=us">evolved</a> a fantastic capacity to find meanings and connections. Doing so once meant the difference between survival and death. Recognizing paw prints in the soil, for example, signified dangerous predators to be avoided, or prey to be captured and consumed. Changes in daylight indicated when to plant crops and when to harvest them. </p>
<p>Even when survival isn’t at stake, it’s <a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/05/180531114642.htm">rewarding</a> to detect a pattern such as a <a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161003093240.htm">familiar face</a> or <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1811878116">song</a>. Finding one, the brain zaps its synapses with a little shot of dopamine, incentivizing itself to keep finding more patterns.</p>
<p>When a number sequence seems to jump out at us, this is an example of <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/reality-check/201111/11-11-11-apophenia-and-the-meaning-life">apophenia</a>: perceiving meaningful connections between unrelated things. The term was <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2800156/">first developed</a> to characterize a symptom of schizophrenia.</p>
<p>Another example of apophenia is <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive/astrology-more-like-religion-than-science/">astrology</a>, which visually connects stars into constellations. These are the familiar Zodiac signs such as “The Ram,” Aries; or “The Archer,” Sagittarius. Each sign is linked to meanings associated with its respective object. For example, people born under the sign of Aries are believed to be stubborn like rams. But those signs don’t exist in the sky in any physical sense, and the system <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/2016/11/does-astrology-need-to-be-true-a-thirty-year-update/">fails scientific tests</a>.</p>
<h2>Reading into numbers</h2>
<p>The date 2/22/22, though striking, carries no inherent meaning beyond its function in our particular calendar. This is true for numbers in general: Their meanings are limited to measuring, labeling or counting things.</p>
<p>“Twosday” is a simple example of a popular form of arithmetical shenanigans: <a href="https://www.dundurn.com/books_/t22117/a9781459705371-mysteries-and-secrets-of-numerology">numerology</a>, the pseudoscientific practice of attaching supernatural significance to numbers. </p>
<p>Numerology can be <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-mystery-of-numbers-9780195089196?q=mystery%20of%20numbers&lang=en&cc=us">traced back</a> 2,500 years to the Greek mathematician Pythagoras, with alternative systems appearing elsewhere, including China and the Middle East. </p>
<p>Numerology may look mathematical, but it’s more akin to palmistry and reading tea leaves. It has been popularized through magazines, books, movies, television programs, websites and other social media. Assessing the extent of numerology’s popularity is difficult, but the belief that certain numbers are good or bad is common. For example, nearly a quarter of Americans <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/297156/united-states-common-superstitions-believe/">say 7 is lucky</a>.</p>
<p>There are <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/15626">many kinds</a> of numerology. The most popular form assigns numbers to names or other words, and then calculates their “root,” also known as the “<a href="https://www.allure.com/story/numerology-how-to-calculate-life-path-destiny-number">destiny number</a>” or “<a href="https://www.numerology.com/articles/your-numerology-chart/expression-number/">expression number</a>”. It starts by assigning a number to each letter of the alphabet: A = 1, B = 2, up to I = 9, then the cycle repeats with J = 1, K = 2, etc. </p>
<p>For example, adding up the five numbers in my own first name – 2, 1, 9, 9, and 7 – yields 28. To find the root, add the digits in 28 to get 10, and then add up those two digits to get 1. For my middle and last names, the roots are 4 and 9. Adding the three roots returns 14; adding those digits reveals that my “destiny number” is 5, which numerology associates with being free-thinking, <a href="https://mattbeech.com/numerology/destiny-number/destiny-5/">adventurous, restless</a> and impatient.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A photograph of someone's hand as they do numerology calculations at a table covered with geodes and a feather." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/446391/original/file-20220214-25314-17x5gyk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/446391/original/file-20220214-25314-17x5gyk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/446391/original/file-20220214-25314-17x5gyk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/446391/original/file-20220214-25314-17x5gyk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=406&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/446391/original/file-20220214-25314-17x5gyk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=510&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/446391/original/file-20220214-25314-17x5gyk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=510&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/446391/original/file-20220214-25314-17x5gyk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=510&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A woman calculates a destiny number based on numerology.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Helin Loik-Tomson/iStock via Getty Images Plus</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>More than coincidence?</h2>
<p>I was 10 years old when I first encountered numerology. A fellow coin collector showed me a clear plastic case holding two gleaming specimens: a copper Lincoln penny and a silver John F. Kennedy half dollar. On the back of the case was a printed label with numerical “facts” <a href="https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/linkin-kennedy/">linking the two presidents</a>. For example:</p>
<p>6: day of the week – Friday – of both assassinations</p>
<p>7: letters in Kennedy’s and Lincoln’s last names</p>
<p>15: letters in both assassins’ names</p>
<p>60: year elected – Lincoln 1860, Kennedy 1960</p>
<p>When you compile enough of these, it gets eerie. The experience was astonishing enough that I still recall it over a half-century later.</p>
<p>Are the Lincoln-Kennedy facts just coincidences? What gets overlooked is that they’ve been drawn from a pool of hundreds or thousands of numerical possibilities. Throw away the boring ones and you’ve framed the remaining coincidences in a way that gives them more credit than they deserve.</p>
<p>[<em>More than 140,000 readers get one of The Conversation’s informative newsletters.</em> <a href="https://memberservices.theconversation.com/newsletters/?source=inline-140K">Join the list today</a>.]</p>
<p>Another way of drawing eerie coincidences from very large pools of possibilities was exploited in “<a href="https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/The-Bible-Code/Michael-Drosnin/9780684849737">The Bible Code</a>,” a best-selling book in the 1990s. The author, Michael Drosnin, took the Old Testament and arranged it into <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/1997/11/hidden-messages-and-the-bible-code">a grid of text</a>. A computer algorithm <a href="https://www.ams.org/notices/199708/review-allyn.pdf">highlighted skip patterns in the grid</a>, such as “every 4th character”, or “2 across, 5 down,” to produce a huge database of letter strings. These were then sifted by another algorithm that searched for words and phrases, and distances between them.</p>
<p>The method seemed to foretell many historical events, including <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/assassination-yitzhak-rabin-never-knew-his-people-shot-him-in-back">the murder of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin</a> in 1995: A particular skip pattern yielded his name near the phrase “assassin that will assassinate.”</p>
<p>Findings such as these can seem impressive. However, <a href="https://users.cecs.anu.edu.au/%7Ebdm/codes/torah.html">critics</a> have proved that the method works just as well using any <a href="https://users.cecs.anu.edu.au/%7Ebdm/codes/torah.html">sufficiently lengthy text</a>. Drosnin himself laid down this gauntlet by challenging critics to find Rabin’s assassination foretold in the novel “Moby-Dick.” <a href="http://users.cecs.anu.edu.au/%7Ebdm/">Mathematician Brendan McKay</a> <a href="http://users.cecs.anu.edu.au/%7Ebdm/dilugim/moby.html">did exactly that</a>, along with “prophecies” for many other deaths – Lincoln’s and Kennedy’s included.</p>
<p>Which coincidences people pay attention to is largely a social phenomenon. What <a href="https://www.stonybrook.edu/commcms/sociology/people/faculty/goode.php">sociologist Erich Goode</a> terms “<a href="http://prometheusbooks.com/books/search/goode,%20erich">paranormalism</a>,” a nonscientific approach to extraordinary claims, is sustained and transmitted by group customs, norms and institutions. “The Bible Code” couldn’t exist without religion, for example, and its popularity was fueled by mass media – such as its author’s <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/19/books/michael-drosnin-dead.html">interviews</a> on “The Oprah Winfrey Show” and elsewhere. In her book “<a href="https://mcfarlandbooks.com/product/scientifical-americans/">Scientifical Americans</a>,” science writer <a href="https://sharonahill.com/">Sharon Hill</a> makes a compelling case that popular culture in the U.S. helps to foster safe havens for individual and collective belief in the pseudoscientific and paranormal.</p>
<p>As for “Twosday,” I’ll conclude by plumbing its “hidden meaning.” Take the three roots of 02, 22 and 2022. We arrive at 2 + 4 + 6 = 12, and the destiny number 3. Some numerologists <a href="https://mattbeech.com/numerology/destiny-number/destiny-3/">associate this number with</a> optimism and joy. Though I may reject the messenger, I’ll accept that message.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/176093/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Barry Markovsky does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Numerology ties in with how our brains work, but that doesn’t mean its claims make sense.Barry Markovsky, Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Sociology, University of South CarolinaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1734332021-12-10T10:09:22Z2021-12-10T10:09:22ZWhen academics become anti-LGBT activists: fear and hate in Indonesian academia<p>In Western academia, it seems common sense that discrimination should have no place in society, including against LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual/transgender) people.</p>
<p>This achievement is the result of decades of struggle and bitter experiences of <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/06/13/being-gay-in-america-is-still-a-radical-act/">LGBT-phobia in Western societies</a>.</p>
<p>Indonesian society, on the other hand, has been <a href="https://theconversation.com/on-gender-diversity-in-indonesia-101087">historically quite tolerant</a> with people of different gender expression and sexual orientation. But the country has experienced <a href="https://www.hrw.org/video-photos/interactive/2016/08/10/2016-indonesias-lgbt-crisis-words">an increasing wave of homophobia in politics and society</a> in the past few years.</p>
<p>This is also the case in Indonesian academia.</p>
<p>I compiled <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mYSN2CVb-euuIhe3R0K2o6-uFWMIFbABvbaFgFckd_U/edit?usp=sharing">a list of incidents throughout 2016-2021</a>. Though probably incomplete, the list involves many institutions and reveals an intense LGBT-hostile atmosphere among Indonesian universities.</p>
<p>These incidents include, among others, the <a href="https://www.tribunnews.com/video/2015/12/04/rektor-hasriadi-akan-pecat-penyebar-virus-lgbt">dismissal of students and staff</a> who share “the LGBT virus”, <a href="http://www.riaubook.com/berita/7899/terungkap-ternyata-ada-komunitas-lgbt-di-kampus-kampus-di-riau-ini-buktinya.html">university-sponsored rallies</a> against LGBT students, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/teror-akademik-masih-membungkam-wacana-keragaman-gender-dan-seksual-di-kampus-indonesia-167202">crackdowns on queer-themed academic discussions</a>.</p>
<p>As Western and Indonesian academia continue to engage in co-operation, we should find common ways of counteracting discrimination, including discrimination against people with non-heteronormative gender expressions and identities.</p>
<h2>Amplifying state-sponsored homophobia</h2>
<p>Over the years, Indonesian universities have joined the state-sponsored homophobia – including <a href="https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2020/09/05/police-lambasted-for-targeting-lgbt-community-in-raid-in-jakarta.html">law enforcement</a> and <a href="https://news.detik.com/berita/d-3125654/menristek-saya-larang-lgbt-di-semua-kampus-itu-tak-sesuai-nilai-kesusilaan">statements by politicians</a> fuelling hatred of LGBT people.</p>
<p>Academics often work hand-in-hand with these institutions and rely on statements from religious authorities, while at the same time providing anti-LGBT activists with seemingly scientific arguments.</p>
<p>Within the academic discourse, for instance, some Indonesian scholars (and also students) reproduce the state’s argument that LGBTs are a threat to an imagined national harmony.</p>
<p>In 2016, the then minister of research, Muhammad Nasir, declared LGBT individuals were <a href="https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2016/01/25/lgbt-not-welcome-university-minister.html">not welcome at Indonesian universities</a>. He said they “corrupt the morals of the nation”. The then minister of defence, Ryamizard Ryacudu, even said the LGBT movement was <a href="https://www.thejakartapost.com/academia/2016/12/22/a-case-against-the-militarys-newfound-proxy-war-obsession.html">part of a proxy war</a> to weaken the nation.</p>
<p>Academics usually refrain from such dramatic statements. But there are some who maintain the idea of LGBTs as a threat.</p>
<p>Indonesian terms for queer gender expressions, both nationally (such as <em>waria</em> or <em>transpuan</em>) and in local cultures (such as <em>bissu</em> in South Sulawesi or <em>tayu</em> in Bengkulu) have increasingly been superseded by the term “LGBT”, which has Western and foreign associations.</p>
<p>Moreover, “LGBT” is linked in both public and academic discourses to derogatory connotations.</p>
<p>Negative stigmas attached to LGBTs in global discourses typically involve pedophilia, Western intervention, pornography and prostitution. However, statements by Indonesian scholars often highlight <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13552074.2018.1429103">health issues (LGBTs as a threat that spreads STDs)</a> as well as <a href="https://www.e-ir.info/2016/03/21/against-state-straightism-five-principles-for-including-lgbt-indonesians/">religious stances</a>.</p>
<p>It is therefore not surprising that anti-LGBT proponents in academia often have a conservative Islamic background.</p>
<p>However, they effectively link their moral claims not only to religion, but also to Indonesian nationalism.</p>
<p>A common example is the use of the phrase, “the young generation of the Indonesian people” (<em>generasi muda bangsa</em>), which is seemingly threatened by sexually transmitted diseases and immoral activities.</p>
<p>Applying the term “<em>bangsa</em>” is an effective tool to connect religious morality with Indonesian nationalism. LGBTs thus emerge as the embodiment of an otherwise vague and abstract threat. </p>
<h2>Academics as anti-LGBT activists</h2>
<p>Conservative Indonesian scholars <a href="https://indonesiaatmelbourne.unimelb.edu.au/ailas-unsuccessful-petition-a-narrow-escape-from-overcriminalisation/">gained public attention in 2017</a> when the Indonesian Family Love Alliance (Aliansi Cinta Keluarga or AILA) sought a judicial review at the Constitutional Court.</p>
<p>They demanded the criminalisation of homosexual activities and LGBT activism, with punishment of up to five years in prison. As usual, these academics argued that LGBTs contribute to the spread of HIV-AIDS.</p>
<p><a href="https://news.detik.com/berita/d-3266050/sidang-mk-kasus-homoseks-ahli-sebut-lgbt-picu-angka-kenaikan-hivaids">They also claimed it is unethical</a> that such people get expensive medicine paid for by public health insurance, making ordinary Indonesians pay for them.</p>
<p>Not surprisingly, the language they used referred not only to empirical findings but also moral stances.</p>
<p>Euis Sunarti, a professor at the Bogor Agricultural Institute (IPB), for instance, is an AILA scholar. She teaches in the field of “family resilience and empowerment” (<em>ketahanan dan pemberdayaan keluarga</em>). In her view, LGBT activities threaten the institution of the family, and therefore the state must take action.</p>
<p>Statements from scholars mirror those of religious authorities and state officials. In this way, they further blur the boundary between religion, the state and science.</p>
<p>This anti-LGBT narrative also serves as a tool for unifying Indonesia’s many social and economic groups. Thus, it perpetuates the idea of a harmonious society at the expense of <a href="https://theconversation.com/onslaughts-against-gays-and-lesbians-challenge-indonesias-lgbt-rights-movement-54639">an already marginalised group</a>.</p>
<p>Sadly, it does so by generating fear and prejudice. </p>
<h2>Counteracting fear and hate</h2>
<p>Many academics from Western countries maintain close ties with scholars and institutions in Indonesia. Since they often support anti-discriminatory actions around the world, they should not turn a blind eye to discrimination against queer people committed by the institutions we are working with. </p>
<p>While open confrontation might not always be effective, I believe critical scholars cannot be quiet when minorities are discriminated against on Indonesian campuses.</p>
<p>The task is not only to challenge <a href="https://www.thejakartapost.com/academia/2020/01/30/rejecting-homophobic-pseudoscience.html">pseudo-scientific anti-LGBT discourses</a> in Indonesian academia, but also to evoke empathy for people who are increasingly marginalised and excluded from education due to their gender expressions and identities.</p>
<p>Fortunately, Indonesia is also home to many critical and engaged scholars. Academic institutions in the Global North can find knowledgeable partners among these scholars that we can work with.</p>
<p>However, Western scholars should not avoid controversial debates with our Indonesian counterparts either. For instance, when signing MoUs or other forms of agreement on co-operation with Indonesian counterparts, issues such as discrimination can be discussed.</p>
<p>Critical scholars can tackle LGBT hate in Indonesia in the same way they criticise, for instance, growing <a href="https://theconversation.com/islamophobia-in-western-media-is-based-on-false-premises-151443">Islamophobia in the West</a>. Stressing to Indonesian partners that state-driven hate against minorities is structurally similar to hatred against Muslims in the West – that is, as a supposed threat to the nation – might be a viable approach.</p>
<p>It is an academic duty to engage in creating a world with less fear and hate. This is something Indonesian and Western scholars should do together.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/173433/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Timo Duile receives funding from the German Research Foundation (DFG). The associated research does not explore topics related to the LGBT community.</span></em></p>As Western and Indonesian academics continue to engage in co-operation, we should find common ways of counteracting discrimination, including discriminatory practices against the LGBT community.Timo Duile, Lecturer and researcher at the Institute for Oriental and Asian Studies, University of BonnLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1653772021-08-05T12:41:37Z2021-08-05T12:41:37ZOlympic athletes excel at their sports but are susceptible to unproven alternative therapies<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414386/original/file-20210803-25-khztso.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C5000%2C3532&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Cupping, K-tape and cryotherapy are a few alternative therapies commonly used by athletes.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/illustration/massage-and-spa-for-men-male-torsos-in-the-royalty-free-illustration/1268389138">juliawhite/iStock via Getty Images Plus</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Australian Olympic swimmer Kyle Chalmers earned a silver medal and his personal-best time in the 100-meter freestyle event at the 2021 Tokyo Games. While most of the world focused on his thrilling performance, others were equally interested in the <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/olympics-cupping-circles-swimmers-backs-b1892490.html">conspicuous, circular bruises</a> on his back and shoulders. Similar marks were seen on <a href="https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/what-are-the-purple-dots-on-michael-phelps-cupping-has-an-olympic-moment/">Michael Phelps</a> in 2016 when he added six medals to his tally to cement his title as history’s most successful Olympian.</p>
<p>Those blemishes were the work of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S2005-2901(11)60001-0">cupping</a>, an alternative therapy in which small glass cups are placed on the skin at sites of injury or soreness, and used to create suction that stimulates “energy flow.” One form of cupping – wet cupping – involves piercing the skin to bleed the area and remove stagnant blood and toxins.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="InstagramEmbed" data-react-props="{"url":"https://www.instagram.com/p/7djtuUyx7j","accessToken":"127105130696839|b4b75090c9688d81dfd245afe6052f20"}"></div></p>
<p>As an <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=F8Gr-jAAAAAJ&hl=en">exercise physiologist</a> who studies critical thinking, I can’t help but wonder how an athlete’s unwitting endorsement of alternative therapy might influence the progression of a sport. This is because cupping is fairly characteristic of <a href="https://www.who.int/health-topics/traditional-complementary-and-integrative-medicine#tab=tab_1">alternative therapy</a> that, by definition, hasn’t been accepted by conventional science and medicine. When tested in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S2005-2901(11)60001-0">controlled studies</a>, cupping doesn’t work. </p>
<p>In fact, all alternative therapies exist on a spectrum, from treatments with some merit to scientifically disproven nonsense. And interventions like cupping, that masquerade as science without fulfilling its robust methodology, are known as <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-is-pseudoscience/">pseudoscience</a>.</p>
<h2>Alternative therapies are rife in sport</h2>
<p>When it comes to unproven alternative therapies, cupping is just the tip of the iceberg. Other such practices in sport include <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21952385/">chiropractic spinal manipulation</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-020-06202-5">nasal strips</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3737916/">hologram bracelets</a>, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2006.028936">oxygen drinks</a>, <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25835541/">reiki (healing hands)</a>, <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26383887/">cryotherapy</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0269215520963846">kinesiology tape or K-tape</a>. </p>
<p>While an estimated <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr012.pdf">40% of Americans have used alternative therapies</a>, approximately 20% have used alternative therapies to enhance <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28987072/">athletic performance</a>. <a href="https://doi.org/10.3810/psm.1998.06.1066">Studies</a> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1012690205057199">in</a> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1097/00042752-200605000-00008">amateur</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5572325">elite</a> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1159/000511247">athletes</a> show a higher prevalence of 50% to 80%.</p>
<p>A detailed discussion of the evidence – or lack thereof – underpinning each practice can be found in <a href="https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429446160">books and scientific journals</a>. However, most alternative therapies generally have three things in common:</p>
<p>1) They’re sold on strong claims and weak evidence.</p>
<p>2) They invoke scientific-sounding terms like “energy,” “metabolites” and “blood flow” to feign scientific legitimacy.</p>
<p>3) They’re based on low-quality studies that are poorly controlled and have small samples sizes. This makes it impossible to distinguish the real benefits of the treatment from perceived or imagined ones.</p>
<h2>Why do some athletes love alternative therapies?</h2>
<p>Despite scientific consensus on their poor efficacy, alternative therapies appear to be more popular among athletes than the general population. So what makes them so popular?</p>
<p>Humans evolved to take mental shortcuts called <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124">heuristics</a> that lead to rapid but imperfect solutions, particularly when making <a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2019.00006">health and fitness decisions</a>. Proponents of some alternative therapies exploit the economy heuristic by offering grand rewards for comparatively little investment. Athletes are always chasing the extra 1% and may be particularly susceptible to extravagant claims.</p>
<p>In some instances, a lack of scientific evidence for a given alternative therapy may be the very reason that someone is drawn to it in the first place. The last decade has seen an upswing in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000683">anti-science movements</a> and unprecedented attacks on scientists around the world. An individual may turn to alternative treatments due to dissatisfaction or distrust in conventional science, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.321.7269.1133">rejection of societal norms</a>, or both. A therapy may become popular simply because it defies the established order.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"426647061870956544"}"></div></p>
<p>Sponsorship is another factor. American athletes only win between <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/29/tokyo-olympics-how-much-athletes-earn.html">$15,000 and $37,500 for an Olympic medal</a>, while British athletes receive no prize money whatsoever. Many have <a href="https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/money/news/g3797/how-olympians-make-money/">regular jobs</a>, while some earn the bulk of their income from <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/oliviaevans/2021/07/31/what-do-some-us-olympic-athletes-spend-and-how-much-can-they-make-going-for-gold/?sh=439e4cfc1f00">paid advertising</a>. Marketing companies are shrewd: <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312116633_Consuming_rationally_How_marketing_is_exploiting_our_cognitive_biases_and_what_we_can_do_about_it">They understand our biases better than we do</a>. A company can increase product sales by sponsoring an athlete and affiliating itself with success, fitness and beauty. It’s a win-win because athletes are able to leverage their hefty social media followings into an advertising base. Seemingly innocuous <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2020.1806897">Instagram posts</a> must not be taken at face value.</p>
<p>Finally, some products like <a href="https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/olympic-pseudoscience-tokyo-edition/">K-tape</a> boost their sales through visibility. This phenomenon, where consumers prefer products they’re more familiar with, is called the <a href="https://doi.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0025848">exposure effect</a>. Increased visibility leads to increased popularity in an ongoing, reciprocal relationship.</p>
<p>Importantly, none of these factors speak to the effectiveness of a product.</p>
<h2>How do alternative therapies benefit athletes?</h2>
<p>It’s not all squandered time and money, however, and there are benefits to some alternative therapies. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.09.134">Meditation</a> has been used to successfully improve anxiety, depression and psychological well-being, and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.03.013">yoga</a> is a valid means of weight loss. Moreover, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.32.3.212">massages</a> and other soft tissue therapies appear to reduce muscle soreness and possibly prevent injury. </p>
<p>A distinction can be made between these and unproven alternative therapies based on the data. Care should be taken not to confound plausible claims like weight loss and relaxation with implausible ones like physical healing and detox. </p>
<p><iframe id="Prqt8" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Prqt8/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Even without a quantifiable mechanism of action, many alternative remedies claim efficacy based on <a href="https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200939040-00004">placebo effects</a>. The placebo effect manifests when a product improves performance via a positive psychological outcome, attributable to an individual’s belief in the product’s effectiveness. The outcome can be powerful. For instance, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1097/00005768-200009000-00019">one study</a> administered flavored water to competitive cyclists and told them it was a glucose supplement. They saw performance improve by 4% relative to a second group, which was told they’d received a placebo.</p>
<p>In Olympic sport, where gold and silver can be decided by less than a half-second, it’s understandable why sports teams may condone use of placebos, particularly when <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3778695/">athletes believe in the powerful effects</a>.</p>
<h2>Are there risks of alternative therapies in sport?</h2>
<p>The downside is that, yes, there are clear risks associated with certain alternative therapies. For instance, there are numerous reports of serious injury and even death following both <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2010.02352.x">chiropractic spinal manipulation</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.3233/JRS-2010-0503">acupuncture</a>. Moreover, skin burns are a common side effect of <a href="https://doi.org/10.5694/mja17.00230">cupping therapy</a>. </p>
<p>Of course, all medical procedures carry risk. But in conventional medicine, physicians make treatment decisions based on a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/s0197-2456(96)00092-x">risk-to-benefit ratio</a>. When the benefit of alternative therapy hinges on a placebo, the potential risks become hard to justify, especially given the possible loss of training time due to injury or other negative outcome that results from an alternative treatment.</p>
<p>The broad and indiscriminate use of alternative therapies in sport may also have downstream consequences for clinical practice. This is because it’s impossible to restrict placebo use only to minor ailments and sports performance. A sincere belief in the effectiveness of an alternative therapy that isn’t backed by science will lead to its inevitable use by some individuals to treat a potentially <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/parents-found-guilty-letting-baby-son-die-meningitis-a7003866.html">serious</a> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4006">condition</a>, sometimes with <a href="http://whatstheharm.net/index.html">fatal consequences</a>.</p>
<h2>Is there a place for alternative therapy?</h2>
<p>Might alternative treatments complement those endorsed by science? Perhaps. But safe practice requires drawing a clear line in the sand to restrict alternative therapies to minor ailments and sports performance, not replace modern medicine.</p>
<p>Pseudoscience is a major barrier to both <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.optom.2017.08.001">evidence-based practice</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199806)82:3%3C407::AID-SCE6%3E3.0.CO;2-G">science education and literacy</a>. That’s why it’s a potential burden in sport, and why education programs are needed to help people <a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pseudo-science/">distinguish science from pseudoscience</a>. Not just in sport, but in all facets of society.</p>
<p>And despite what you may hear in Olympics coverage, <a href="https://news.berkeley.edu/2018/05/23/rehabilitating-lactate-from-poison-to-cure/">lactic acid does not cause fatigue</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/165377/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nicholas B. Tiller is a board member of the Pulmonary Education and Research Foundation (PERF). </span></em></p>Many elite athletes turn to alternative therapies to improve performance and enhance recovery. But are these treatments helping or hindering their quest for sporting success?Nicholas B. Tiller, Research Fellow (exercise physiology/respiratory medicine), University of California, Los AngelesLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1388142021-03-08T19:06:29Z2021-03-08T19:06:29Z5 ways to spot if someone is trying to mislead you when it comes to science<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/375296/original/file-20201216-13-1ym7kyk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C6000%2C3997&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>It’s not a new thing for people to try to mislead you when it comes to science. But in the age of COVID-19 — when we’re being bombarded with even more information than usual, when there’s increased uncertainty, and when we may be feeling overwhelmed and fearful — we’re perhaps even more susceptible to being deceived.</p>
<p>The challenge is to be able to identify when this may be happening. Sometimes it’s easy, as often even the most basic fact-checking and logic can be potent weapons against misinformation.</p>
<p>But often, it can be hard. People who are trying either to make you believe something that isn’t true, or to doubt something that is true, use a variety of strategies that can manipulate you very effectively. </p>
<p>Here are five to look out for.</p>
<h2>1. The ‘us versus them’ narrative</h2>
<p>This is one of the most common tactics used to mislead. It taps into our intrinsic <a href="https://apnews.com/article/ap-top-news-health-ap-fact-check-immigration-lifestyle-c35625b68fbbddbfd996832ec30adccb">distrust of authority</a> and paints those with evidence-based views as part of some other group that’s not be trusted. This other group — whether people or an institution — is supposedly working together against the common good, and may even want to harm us.</p>
<p>Recently we’ve seen federal MP Craig Kelly use this device. He has repeatedly referred to “<a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/covid-19-patients-have-died-after-being-denied-drugs-by-big-government-claims-kelly-20210204-p56zmx.html">big goverment</a>” being behind a conspiracy to withhold hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin from the public (these drugs currently <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/chief-medical-officer-slaps-down-craig-kelly-s-covid-19-theories-20210113-p56tuq.html">don’t have proven benefits</a> against COVID-19). Kelly is suggesting there are forces working to prevent doctors from prescribing these drugs to treat COVID-19, and that he’s on our side.</p>
<p>His assertion is designed to distract from, or completely dismiss, what the scientific evidence is telling us. It’s targeted at people who feel disenfranchised and are predisposed to believing these types of claims. </p>
<p>Although this is one of the least sophisticated strategies used to mislead, and easy to spot, it can be very effective.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/bushfires-bots-and-arson-claims-australia-flung-in-the-global-disinformation-spotlight-129556">Bushfires, bots and arson claims: Australia flung in the global disinformation spotlight</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>2. ‘I’m not a scientist, but…’</h2>
<p>People tend to use <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-017-0124.pdf?origin=ppub">the phrase</a> “I’m not a scientist, but…” as a sort of universal disclaimer which they feel allows them to say whatever they want, regardless of scientific accuracy.</p>
<p>A phrase with similar intent is “I know what the science says, but I’m keeping an open mind”. People who want to disregard what the evidence is showing, but at the same time want to appear reasonable and credible, often use these phrases.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A woman wearing a mask looks at her smartphone." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/387921/original/file-20210305-15-8y5v42.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/387921/original/file-20210305-15-8y5v42.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/387921/original/file-20210305-15-8y5v42.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/387921/original/file-20210305-15-8y5v42.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/387921/original/file-20210305-15-8y5v42.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/387921/original/file-20210305-15-8y5v42.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/387921/original/file-20210305-15-8y5v42.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Misinformation has become a significant issue during COVID-19.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Politicians are among the most frequent offenders. On an episode of Q&A in 2020, Senator Jim Molan indicated he was not “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/feb/04/im-not-relying-on-evidence-for-climate-change-jim-molan-angers-audience-in-new-look-qa">relying on the evidence</a>” to form his conclusions about whether climate change was caused by humans. He was keeping an open mind, he said.</p>
<p>If you hear any statements that sound faintly like these ones, particularly from a politician, alarm bells should ring very loudly.</p>
<h2>3. Reference to ‘the science not being settled’</h2>
<p>This is perhaps one of the most powerful strategies used to mislead. </p>
<p>There are of course times when the science is not settled, and when this is the case, scientists openly argue different points of view based on the evidence available.</p>
<p>Currently, experts are having an important debate around <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-04/covid-19-aerosol-spread-concerns-in-melbourne-hotel-quarantine/13120058">the role of tiny airborne particles called aerosols</a> in the transmission of COVID-19. As for most things COVID-related, we’re working with limited and uncertain evidence, and the landscape is in constant flux. This type of debate is healthy. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-deal-with-the-craig-kelly-in-your-life-a-guide-to-tackling-coronavirus-contrarians-154638">How to deal with the Craig Kelly in your life: a guide to tackling coronavirus contrarians</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>But people might suggest the science isn’t settled in a mischievous way, to overstate the degree of uncertainty in an area. This strategy exploits the broader community’s limited understanding of the scientific process, including the fact all scientific findings are associated with a degree of uncertainty.</p>
<p>It’s well documented the tobacco industry designed the playbook on this to <a href="https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/56355269.pdf">dismiss the evidence</a> that smoking causes lung cancer.</p>
<p>The goal here is to raise doubt, create confusion and undermine the science. The power in <a href="https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2005-jun-24-oe-michaels24-story.html">this strategy</a> lies in the fact it’s relatively easy to employ — particularly in today’s digital age. </p>
<h2>4. Overly simplistic explanations</h2>
<p>Oversimplifications and generalisations are where many conspiracy theories are born. </p>
<p>Science is often messy, complex and full of nuance. The truth can be much harder to explain, and can sometimes sound less plausible, than a simple but incorrect explanation. </p>
<p>We’re naturally drawn to simple explanations. And if they tap into our fears and exploit our cognitive biases — systematic errors we make when we interpret information — they can be extremely seductive. </p>
<p>Conspiracy theories, such as the one suggesting <a href="https://theconversation.com/four-experts-investigate-how-the-5g-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory-began-139137">5G is the cause of COVID-19</a>, take off because they offer a simple explanation for something frightening and complex. This particular claim also feeds into concerns some people may have about new technologies.</p>
<p>As a general rule, when something appears too good or too bad to be true, it usually is. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A group of three people working on a desktop computer." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/387924/original/file-20210305-13-1rvry8s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/387924/original/file-20210305-13-1rvry8s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/387924/original/file-20210305-13-1rvry8s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/387924/original/file-20210305-13-1rvry8s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/387924/original/file-20210305-13-1rvry8s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/387924/original/file-20210305-13-1rvry8s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/387924/original/file-20210305-13-1rvry8s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Some tactics may be easier to spot than others.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>5. Cherry-picking</h2>
<p>People who use this approach treat scientific studies like individual chocolates in a gift box, where you can choose the ones you like and disregard the ones you don’t. Of course, this isn’t how science works. </p>
<p>It’s important to understand not all studies are equal; some provide much stronger evidence than others. You can’t just conveniently put all your faith in the studies that align with your views, and ignore those that don’t. </p>
<p>When scientists evaluate evidence, they go through a systematic process to assess the whole body of evidence. This is a crucial task that requires expertise. </p>
<p>The cherry-picking tactic can be hard to counter because unless you’re across all the evidence, you’re not likely to know whether the studies being presented have been deliberately curated to mislead you.</p>
<p>This is yet another reason to rely on the experts who understand the full breadth of the evidence and can interpret it sensibly.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/no-5g-radiation-doesnt-cause-or-spread-the-coronavirus-saying-it-does-is-destructive-135695">No, 5G radiation doesn't cause or spread the coronavirus. Saying it does is destructive</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The pandemic has highlighted the speed at which misinformation can travel, and how dangerous this can be. Regardless of how sensible or educated we think we are, we can all be taken in by people trying to mislead us. </p>
<p>The key to preventing this is to understand some of the common tactics used to mislead, so we’ll be better placed to spot them, and this may prompt us to seek out more reliable sources of information.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/138814/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Hassan Vally does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In the digital age, and the COVID era, this is more important than ever.Hassan Vally, Associate Professor, La Trobe UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1321582020-03-09T12:22:22Z2020-03-09T12:22:22ZHow technology can combat the rising tide of fake science<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/318753/original/file-20200304-66112-vybpt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=63%2C13%2C1178%2C840&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A crop circle in Switzerland.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CropCircleW.jpg">Jabberocky/Wikimedia Commons</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Science gets a lot of respect these days. Unfortunately, it’s also getting a lot of competition from misinformation. Seven in 10 Americans think the benefits from science outweigh the harms, and nine in 10 think science and technology will create <a href="https://nsf.gov/statistics/2018/nsb20181/report/sections/science-and-technology-public-attitudes-and-understanding/highlights">more opportunities for future generations</a>. Scientists have made dramatic progress in understanding the universe and the mechanisms of biology, and advances in computation benefit all fields of science. </p>
<p>On the other hand, Americans are surrounded by a rising tide of misinformation and fake science. Take climate change. Scientists are in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024">almost complete agreement that people are the primary cause of global warming</a>. Yet polls show that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02406-9">a third of the public disagrees</a> with this conclusion.</p>
<p>In my <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=OrRLRQ4AAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">30 years of studying and promoting scientific literacy</a>, I’ve found that college educated adults have large holes in their basic science knowledge and they’re disconcertingly <a href="https://ejse.southwestern.edu/article/view/17315">susceptible to superstition and beliefs that aren’t based on any evidence</a>. One way to counter this is to make it easier for people to detect pseudoscience online. To this end, my lab at the University of Arizona has developed an artificial intelligence-based pseudoscience detector that we plan to freely release as a web browser extension and smart phone app.</p>
<h2>Americans’ predilection for fake science</h2>
<p>Americans are prone to superstition and paranormal beliefs. An annual survey done by sociologists at Chapman University finds that <a href="https://blogs.chapman.edu/wilkinson/2018/10/16/paranormal-america-2018/">more than half believe in spirits and the existence of ancient civilizations</a> like Atlantis, and more than a third think that aliens have visited the Earth in the past or are visiting now. Over 75% hold multiple paranormal beliefs. The survey shows that these numbers have increased in recent years.</p>
<p><iframe id="IbP7D" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/IbP7D/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Widespread belief in astrology is a pet peeve of my colleagues in astronomy. It’s long had a foothold in the popular culture through horoscopes in newspapers and magazines <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2018/01/the-new-age-of-astrology/550034/">but currently it’s booming</a>. Belief is strong even among the most educated. My surveys of college undergraduates show that three-quarters of them <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/AER2010040">think that astrology is very or “sort of” scientific</a> and only half of science majors recognize it as not at all scientific.</p>
<p>Allan Mazur, a sociologist at Syracuse University, has delved into <a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9780203788967">the nature of irrational belief systems</a>, their cultural roots, and their political impact. Conspiracy theories are, by definition, resistant to evidence or data that might prove them false. Some are at least amusing. Adherents of the flat Earth theory turn back the clock on two millennia of scientific progress. <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/9/16424622/reddit-conspiracy-theories-memes-irony-flat-earth">Interest in this bizarre idea has surged in the past five years</a>, spurred by social media influencers and the echo chamber nature of web sites like Reddit. As with climate change denial, <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-47279253">many come to this belief through YouTube videos</a>.</p>
<p>However, the consequences of fake science are no laughing matter. In matters of health and climate change, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.190161">misinformation can be a matter of life and death</a>. Over a 90-day period spanning December, January and February, people liked, shared and commented on posts from sites containing <a href="https://www.zdnet.com/article/coronavirus-misinformation-is-increasing-newsguard-finds/">false or misleading information about COVID-19</a> 142 times more than they did information from the Centers for Disease Control and the World Health Organization. </p>
<p>Combating fake science is an urgent priority. In a world that’s increasingly dependent on science and technology, civic society can only function when the electorate is well informed. </p>
<p>Educators must roll up their sleeves and do a better job of teaching critical thinking to young people. However, the problem goes beyond the classroom. The internet is the <a href="https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2018/nsb20181/report">first source of science information</a> for 80% of people ages 18 to 24. </p>
<p>One study found that a majority of a random sample of 200 YouTube videos on climate change <a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2019.00036">denied that humans were responsible or claimed that it was a conspiracy</a>. The videos peddling conspiracy theories got the most views. Another study found that <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/feb/21/climate-tweets-twitter-bots-analysis">a quarter of all tweets on climate were generated by bots</a> and they preferentially amplified messages from climate change deniers.</p>
<h2>Technology to the rescue?</h2>
<p>The recent success of machine learning and AI in <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.00648">detecting fake news</a> points the way to detecting fake science online. The key is <a href="https://www.explainthatstuff.com/introduction-to-neural-networks.html">neural net</a> technology. Neural nets are loosely modeled on the human brain. They consist of many interconnected computer processors that identify meaningful patterns in data like words and images. Neural nets already permeate everyday life, particularly in <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.02709">natural language processing</a> systems like Amazon’s Alexa and Google’s language translation capability.</p>
<p>At the University of Arizona, we have trained neural nets on handpicked popular articles about climate change and biological evolution, and the neural nets are 90% successful in distinguishing wheat from chaff. With a quick scan of a site, our neural net can tell if its content is scientifically sound or climate-denial junk. After more refinement and testing we hope to have neural nets that can work across all domains of science. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/318416/original/file-20200303-66064-2dk56c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/318416/original/file-20200303-66064-2dk56c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318416/original/file-20200303-66064-2dk56c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318416/original/file-20200303-66064-2dk56c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318416/original/file-20200303-66064-2dk56c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=591&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318416/original/file-20200303-66064-2dk56c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=591&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318416/original/file-20200303-66064-2dk56c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=591&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Neural net technology under development at the University of Arizona will flag science websites with a color code indicating their reliability (left). A smartphone app version will gamify the process of declaring science articles real or fake (right).</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Chris Impey</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The goal is a web browser extension that would detect when the user is looking at science content and deduce whether or not it’s real or fake. If it’s misinformation, the tool will suggest a reliable web site on that topic. My colleagues and I also plan to gamify the interface with a smart phone app that will let people compete with their friends and relatives to detect fake science. Data from the best of these participants will be used to help train the neural net.</p>
<p>Sniffing out fake science should be easier than sniffing out fake news in general, because subjective opinion plays a minimal role in legitimate science, which is characterized by evidence, logic and verification. Experts can readily distinguish legitimate science from conspiracy theories and arguments motivated by ideology, which means machine learning systems can be trained to, as well. </p>
<p>“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.” These words of <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2010/11/moynihan-letters-201011">Daniel Patrick Moynihan</a>, advisor to four presidents, could be the mantra for those trying to keep science from being drowned by misinformation.</p>
<p>[<em>You’re smart and curious about the world. So are The Conversation’s authors and editors.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=youresmart">You can read us daily by subscribing to our newsletter</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/132158/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Chris Impey does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The internet has allowed pseudoscience to flourish. Artificial intelligence could help steer people away from the bad information.Chris Impey, University Distinguished Professor of Astronomy, University of ArizonaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1302872020-01-28T19:00:27Z2020-01-28T19:00:27ZMarketing, not medicine: Gwyneth Paltrow’s The Goop Lab whitewashes traditional health therapies for profit<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/312163/original/file-20200127-81395-a6lqkk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=1576%2C0%2C2916%2C2997&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Netflix's new show fails to critically explore the alternative therapies it promotes.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Adam Rose/Netflix</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In Gwyneth Paltrow’s new Netflix series, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11561206/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">The Goop Lab</a>, Paltrow explores a variety of wellness management approaches, from “energy healing” to psychedelic psychotherapy. </p>
<p>Goop has long been criticised for making unsubstantiated health claims and advancing pseudoscience, but the brand is incredibly popular. It was <a href="https://fortune.com/2018/03/30/gwyneth-paltrow-goop-series-c-valuation-250-million/">valued at over US$250 million</a> (A$370 million) in 2019.</p>
<p>The alternative health industry is worth <a href="https://my-ibisworld-com.ezproxy.uow.edu.au/au/en/industry/x0015/industry-at-a-glance">A$4.1 billion</a> in Australia alone – and projected to grow.</p>
<p>A key driver of the industry is increased health consciousness. With easier access to information, better health literacy, and open minds, consumers are increasingly seeking alternatives to managing their well-being.</p>
<p>Goop has capitalised on the rise in popularity of alternative health therapies – treatments not commonly practised under mainstream Western medicine. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MunlAm7IGsE?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Health systems in countries such as Australia are based on Western medicine, eschewing traditional and indigenous practices. These Western systems operate on measurable and objective indicators of health and well-being, ignoring the fact <a href="https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JSOCM-08-2017-0049/full/html">subjective assessments</a> – such as job satisfaction and life contentment – are just as important in evaluating quality of life. </p>
<p>This gap between objective measures and subjective assessments creates a gap in the marketplace brands can capitalise on – not always for the benefit of the consumer. </p>
<p>The Goop Lab fails to engage with the cultural heritage of traditional health and well-being practices in any meaningful way, missing an important opportunity to forward the holistic health cause. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/gwyneth-paltrows-new-goop-lab-is-an-infomercial-for-her-pseudoscience-business-129674">Gwyneth Paltrow's new Goop Lab is an infomercial for her pseudoscience business</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The uncritical manner in which these therapies are presented, failure to attribute their traditional origins, absence of fact-checking, and lack of balanced representation of the arguments for and against these therapies only serve to set back the wellness cause.</p>
<h2>New to the West, not new to the world</h2>
<p>Many of the historical and cultural origins of the therapies in The Goop Lab are not investigated, effectively <a href="https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/whitewashing">whitewashing</a> them. </p>
<p>The first episode, The Healing Trip, explores psychedelic psychotherapy, suggesting this is a new and novel approach to managing mental health. </p>
<p>In reality, psychedelics have been used in non-Western cultures for <a href="https://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/docs/default-source/members/sigs/spirituality-spsig/ben-sessa-from-sacred-plants-to-psychotherapy.pdf?sfvrsn=d1bd0269_2">thousands of years</a>, only recently enjoying a re-emergence in the Western world.</p>
<p>In the second episode, Cold Comfort, the “<a href="https://www.wimhofmethod.com/">Wim Hof Method</a>” (breathing techniques and cold therapy) is also marketed as a novel therapy. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/312165/original/file-20200127-81411-ob746r.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/312165/original/file-20200127-81411-ob746r.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=344&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/312165/original/file-20200127-81411-ob746r.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=344&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/312165/original/file-20200127-81411-ob746r.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=344&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/312165/original/file-20200127-81411-ob746r.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/312165/original/file-20200127-81411-ob746r.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/312165/original/file-20200127-81411-ob746r.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">For the ‘Hof method’ a group of Goop staff members did yoga on the banks of Lake Tahoe.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Screenshot/Netflix</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The meditation component of Hof’s method ignores its Hindu origins, documented in <a href="https://www.ancient.eu/The_Vedas/">the Vedas</a> from around 1500 BCE. The breathing component closely resembles <em>prāṇāyāma</em>, a yogic breathing practice. The “Hof dance” looks a lot like <a href="http://www.taichisociety.net/tai-chi.html">tai chi</a>, an ancient Chinese movement practice. </p>
<p>Whitewashing these alternative therapies represents a form of colonisation and commodification of non-Western practices that have existed for centuries. </p>
<p>The experts showcased are usually white and from Western cultures, rather than people of the cultures and ethnicities practising these therapies as part of their centuries-old traditions. </p>
<p>Rather than accessing these therapies from authentic, original sources, often the consumer’s only option is to turn to Western purveyors. Like Paltrow, these purveyors are business people capitalising on consumers’ desire and pursuit of wellness. </p>
<h2>Only the rich?</h2>
<p>Paltrow describes Goop as a resource to help people “optimise the self”. But many of these therapies are economically inaccessible. </p>
<p>In The Health-Span Plan, Paltrow undergoes the five-day “Fast Mimicking Diet” by <a href="https://prolonfmd.com/">ProLon</a> – a diet designed to reap the health benefits of fasting while extremely restricting calories. The food for the treatment period costs US$249 (A$368) (but shipping is free!). The average Australian household spends just over <a href="https://www.budgetdirect.com.au/home-contents-insurance/research/average-grocery-bill-statistics.html">A$250</a> on groceries weekly. </p>
<p>Paltrow also undergoes a “vampire facial”, where platelet-rich plasma extracted from your own blood is applied to your skin. This facial is available at one Sydney skin clinic for between A$550 and A$1,499.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/312166/original/file-20200128-81352-1i0hwwl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/312166/original/file-20200128-81352-1i0hwwl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=336&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/312166/original/file-20200128-81352-1i0hwwl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=336&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/312166/original/file-20200128-81352-1i0hwwl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=336&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/312166/original/file-20200128-81352-1i0hwwl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=422&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/312166/original/file-20200128-81352-1i0hwwl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=422&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/312166/original/file-20200128-81352-1i0hwwl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=422&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Paltrow’s vampire facial is touted as a ‘natural alternative’ to botox.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Screenshot/Netflix</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>These therapies commodify wellness – and health – as a luxury product, implying only the wealthy deserve to live well, and longer. </p>
<p>This sits in stark odds with the goals of the <a href="https://www.who.int/about/who-we-are/constitution">World Health Organisation</a>, which views health as a fundamental human right “without distinction of race, religion, political belief, economic, or social condition”.</p>
<h2>A right to live well</h2>
<p>Companies like Goop have a responsibility to explain the science and the origins of the methods they explore. </p>
<p>Given their profit-driven motive, many absolve themselves of this responsibility with an easy disclaimer their content is intended to “entertain and inform – not provide medical advice”. This pushes the burden of critically researching these therapies onto the consumer.</p>
<p>Governments should seek to fund public health systems, such as Medicare, to integrate traditional health practices from other cultures through consultation and working in collaboration with those cultures. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/traditional-medicines-must-be-integrated-into-health-care-for-culturally-diverse-groups-114980">Traditional medicines must be integrated into health care for culturally diverse groups</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Perhaps this will give everyone access to a wellness system to help us live well, longer. This way, citizens are less likely to be driven towards opportunists such as Goop seeking to capitalise on our fundamental human right to live well.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/130287/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nadia Zainuddin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Alternative therapies have a lot to offer consumers. The Goop Lab only serves to set back the wellness cause.Nadia Zainuddin, Senior Lecturer, University of WollongongLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1296742020-01-12T13:36:24Z2020-01-12T13:36:24ZGwyneth Paltrow’s new Goop Lab is an infomercial for her pseudoscience business<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/309506/original/file-20200110-97149-1gq4ogn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=35%2C287%2C3796%2C2610&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Goop Lab launches Jan. 24, 2020: it will likely be full of magical thinking and unproven health stories — making it a huge conflict of interest for Gwyneth Paltrow. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Last week, Netflix <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MunlAm7IGsE">dropped the trailer</a> for Gwyneth Paltrow’s new show <em>The Goop Lab</em>. It is a six-episode docuseries launching on Jan. 24 that, according to the trailers, focuses on approaches to wellness that are “out there,” “unregulated” and “dangerous.” (Read: science-free.)</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv-radio/118635356/irresponsible-netflix-slammed-as-trailer-for-new-gwyneth-paltrow-show-released">backlash</a> by health-care professionals and science advocates was immediate and widespread. And for good reason. <a href="https://www.bustle.com/p/a-doctor-reacts-to-netflixs-the-goop-lab-trailer-19769024">As noted</a> by my friend, obstetrician and gynecologist <a href="https://drjengunter.com">Dr. Jen Gunter</a> in <em>Bustle</em> magazine, the trailer is classic Goop: “Some fine information presented alongside unscientific, unproven, potentially harmful therapies….” </p>
<p>We know <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/celebrities-gwyneth-paltrow-made-2010s-decade-health-wellness-misinformation-ncna1107501">the spread</a> of this kind of health misinformation can have a significant and detrimental impact on a range of health behaviours and beliefs. This is the <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-to-win-the-fight-against-health-and-wellness-bunk-we-must-leave-the/">age of misinformation</a> and this show seems likely to add to the noise and public confusion about how to live a healthy lifestyle.</p>
<p>But what has been largely overlooked in the <a href="https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2020/1/10/21056426/gwyneth-paltrow-is-straight-up-trolling-her-critics-now">initial wave of critiques</a> is the conflict-of-interest issue. The producers of this show — that is, Gwyneth Paltrow and her company Goop — benefit directly from not only the show being popular but also from the legitimization of pseudoscience. This show is, basically, an infomercial for the Goop brand, which is built around <a href="https://www.vox.com/2019/2/7/18215395/netflix-gwyneth-paltrow-series-goop-pseudoscience">science-free</a> products and ideas.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MunlAm7IGsE?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption"><em>The Goop Lab</em> trailer on Netflix. The show drops Jan. 24, 2020.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Marketing pseudoscience</h2>
<p>To be fair, I have yet to see a full episode. But given the content of the trailer and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/business/goop-vaginal-egg-settlement.html">Goop’s history</a> of pushing harmful nonsense, there is little reason to be optimistic about the role of science in the series. Regardless, the mere existence of the series will allow Paltrow and Goop to <a href="https://www.fastcompany.com/90449046/netflix-and-sephora-in-the-same-day-what-is-goops-secret-non-stick-ingredient">build the brand</a>, which is currently <a href="https://www.insider.com/goop-history-gwyneth-paltrow-controversy-products-2019-9">estimated</a> to be worth US$250 million. </p>
<p>The show serves as an opportunity to market the kind of magical thinking and pseudoscience that will help to sell Goop’s products. It would be like Netflix streaming a show called <em>The Coca-Cola Beverage Lab</em> or the <em>The Starbucks Coffee Adventure</em>.</p>
<p>One of the things that attracts people to the alternative health practices pushed by entities like Goop is frustration with the <a href="https://www.drugwatch.com/news/2018/03/07/big-pharma-doesnt-want-you-to-know-alternatives/">impact of private industry and the profit motive</a> — particularly in the context of the pharmaceutical industry — on the conventional health-care system.</p>
<p>This concern about the impact of industry is understandable. There is a <a href="https://www.statnews.com/2019/02/26/anti-vaccine-movement-pharma-tarnished-reputation/">vast literature</a> highlighting industry misbehaviour and the adverse consequences of Big Pharma’s influence on research, clinical practice and clinical guidelines. Awareness of these issues has contributed to a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/23/upshot/do-you-trust-the-medical-profession.html">decrease in trust</a> in the medical profession and even to harmful trends like <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11673-016-9756-7">vaccination hesitancy</a>.</p>
<p>For the <a href="https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/why-are-doctors-so-against-alternative-medicine-1.188177">advocates</a> of alternative approaches to wellness, conventional medicine is <a href="https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/health-care/item/28523-feds-plot-war-on-natural-health-boosting-big-pharma-profits">often positioned</a> as irrevocably compromised and corrupt. And many have come to believe even <a href="https://www.globalresearch.ca/big-pharmas-diabolical-plan-to-destroy-the-vitamin-herbal-supplement-industry/5425769">extreme versions</a> of this narrative. </p>
<p><a href="http://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.190">A 2014 survey</a> found 37 per cent of Americans believe (and another 31 per cent think it could be true) that the “Food and Drug Administration is deliberately preventing the public from getting natural cures for cancer and other diseases because of pressure from drug companies.” Goop has also enabled these kinds of <a href="https://drjengunter.com/2017/12/01/gwyneth-paltrow-to-feature-doctor-who-thinks-aids-is-a-big-pharma-scam-at-in-goop-health/">extreme perspectives</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/309507/original/file-20200110-97183-1wn6lax.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/309507/original/file-20200110-97183-1wn6lax.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/309507/original/file-20200110-97183-1wn6lax.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/309507/original/file-20200110-97183-1wn6lax.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/309507/original/file-20200110-97183-1wn6lax.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/309507/original/file-20200110-97183-1wn6lax.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/309507/original/file-20200110-97183-1wn6lax.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Goop Lab stars Gwyneth Paltrow and Elise Loehne.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Netflix)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Alternative medicine is an industry</h2>
<p>The implication, of course, is that alternative approaches are somehow untainted or, at least, less tainted by vested interests and are, therefore, the better choice. But this “clean hands” framing is <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/2011/07/conflicts_of_interest_in_alternative_medicine/">patently false</a>.</p>
<p>First, we need to recognize that alternative medicine is also a <a href="https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/he-global-complementary-and-alternative-medicine-market-size-is-expected-to-generate-a-revenue-of-usd-210-81-billion-by-2026--300948215.html">huge industry</a>. The worldwide “wellness” <a href="https://globalwellnessinstitute.org/press-room/press-releases/wellness-now-a-4-2-trillion-global-industry/">market</a>, which is largely composed of unproven and “alternative” modalities, has been estimated to be worth over US$4 trillion. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/herbal-medicine-market-research-reports-2019-global-industry-size-share-emerging-trends-growth-boosted-by-demand-and-advanced-technology-till-2023-2019-10-02">sale of herbal medicine and supplements</a> are also multi-billion dollar industries. Given the size of these markets, it would be naive to believe that alternative medicine is somehow missing the twisting profit-motive incentives that have created problems for conventional health care.</p>
<p>Second, the alternative health community is also rife with <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2019/10/15/fdc01078-c29c-11e9-b5e4-54aa56d5b7ce_story.html">conflicts</a> and biases. To cite just a few examples, naturopaths profit from the <a href="https://www.naturopathicdiaries.com/in-office-sales-ethical-problem-naturopaths/">in-office sale</a> of products and have <a href="https://www.statnews.com/2016/05/17/naturopaths-go-mainstream/">partnered</a> with the vitamin industry to expand the reach of their practice. </p>
<p>In addition, <a href="https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/chinese-systematic-reviews-of-acupuncture/">alternative medicine research</a> has been influenced by <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9551280">various systemic</a> <a href="https://edzardernst.com/2014/05/and-this-is-why-we-might-as-well-forget-about-chinese-acupuncture-trials/">biases</a>. And we shouldn’t forget that many of the most commonly used alternative products, most notably supplements and <a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/id/31188920/ns/health-alternative_medicine/t/many-herbal-products-made-big-pharma/#.Xhd88y0ZOu4">herbal remedies</a>, are often <a href="https://pharma.elsevier.com/pharma-rd/link-big-pharma-supplement-industry/">made by the very pharmaceutical industry</a> that alternative wellness devotees are seeking to avoid.</p>
<p>Third, <a href="https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/disgraced-and-discredited-gastroenterologist-andrew-wakefied-nelson-mandela-and-jesus-christ-rolled-up-into-one/">motivated reasoning</a> plays a big role here. When an individual or a company has built a profession or a business model around a particular worldview, this commitment will have an impact on how the relevant evidence is interpreted, used and presented to the public. </p>
<p>If you are a practising homeopath, for instance, it would be tremendously difficult to accept what the evidence says about the remedies you offer. Indeed, accepting the science would mean you would lose your livelihood and professional identity.</p>
<p>More needs to be done to combat the adverse impact that conflicts of interest issues can have on bio-medical research and clinical practice. But we also need to recognize that profound conflicts of interest exist in the alternative health and wellness domain. We should not give those involved with this industry — including Paltrow and Goop — a pass.</p>
<p>[ <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/ca/newsletters?utm_source=TCCA&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=expertise">Expertise in your inbox. Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter and get a digest of academic takes on today’s news, every day.</a></em> ]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/129674/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Timothy Caulfield receives funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Genome Canada, and the Canada Research Chairs Program. He is affiliated with Peacock Alley Entertainment and Speakers' Spotlight. Caulfield also had a show, "A User's Guide to Cheating Death", that was on Netflix. </span></em></p>Gwyneth Paltrow’s new Netflix series, The Goop Lab, raises serious questions about the spread of health misinformation as well as the conflict of interest the show represents.Timothy Caulfield, Canada Research Chair in Health Law and Policy; Professor, Faculty of Law and School of Public Health; and Research Director, Health Law Institute, University of AlbertaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1261532019-10-31T14:31:37Z2019-10-31T14:31:37ZVictorian scientists thought they’d found an explanation for ghosts – but the public didn’t want to hear it<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/299669/original/file-20191031-187898-rmntn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C1284%2C1781&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Ebenezer Scrooge is confronted by the apparition of his dead business partner, Jacob Marley.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Christmas_Carol#/media/File:Marley's_Ghost_-_A_Christmas_Carol_(1843),_opposite_25_-_BL.jpg">John Leech/Wikipedia</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>As the film Ghostbusters showed, true believers in the supernatural rarely prosper in the scientific establishment. Throughout history, scientists who entertained theories on ghosts, magic and the afterlife were discredited by their peers and condemned for tarnishing the rational foundations of the discipline. Even Isaac Newton carefully <a href="https://riviste.fupress.net/index.php/subs/article/view/12">downplayed his interest in alchemy</a> to preserve his reputation as the father of modern science.</p>
<p>Victorian Britain experienced the <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/9741666-the-ghost-story-1840-1920">golden age of the literary ghost story</a> – when imaginations ran wild at the very thought of the supernatural. But at the same time, there seemed no dark corner that a rational, scientific mind couldn’t illuminate. Researchers such as John Ferriar and Samuel Hibbert were keen to clear up all the talk of phantoms. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/299657/original/file-20191031-187938-1kajcwt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/299657/original/file-20191031-187938-1kajcwt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299657/original/file-20191031-187938-1kajcwt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299657/original/file-20191031-187938-1kajcwt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299657/original/file-20191031-187938-1kajcwt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=473&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299657/original/file-20191031-187938-1kajcwt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=473&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299657/original/file-20191031-187938-1kajcwt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=473&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">With their scientific remedy to hauntings and apparitions, the Ghostbusters may have found a favourable audience in Victorian Britain.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ExpoSYFY_-_Ghostbusters_(10773003456).jpg">Urko Dorronsoro/Wikipedia</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>These pioneering physicians interpreted sightings of ghosts not as external entities, but as the product of glitches in the brain or “afterimages” from overstimulated optical nerves. For such theorists, the supernatural originated in the darkest recesses of the mind, with all its self delusions.</p>
<p>Apparitions weren’t the dead appearing to the living, but fleeting illusions thrown up by an unpredictable psyche, often provoked by ailments and poor health. As <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/113-you-may-be-an-undigested-bit-of-beef-a-blot">Ebenezer Scrooge said</a> to the ghost of his late business partner Jacob Marley in Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>You may be an undigested bit of beef, a blot of mustard, a crumb of cheese, a fragment of underdone potato. There’s more of gravy than of grave about you …!</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But many people enjoyed entertaining these self delusions. From its origins in upstate New York in 1848, spiritualism – the belief that spirits of the dead could communicate with the living – spread to Britain in the 1850s. One of its appeals was that it seemed to offer observable, empirical evidence of the influence of the spirit world upon our material surroundings.</p>
<p>During seances – meetings in which people tried to contact the deceased through a medium – spirits could supposedly cause furniture to lift and move. The eminent physicist Michael Faraday set out to clear up these strange happenings.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/299654/original/file-20191031-187934-yfnwt2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/299654/original/file-20191031-187934-yfnwt2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299654/original/file-20191031-187934-yfnwt2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299654/original/file-20191031-187934-yfnwt2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299654/original/file-20191031-187934-yfnwt2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=647&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299654/original/file-20191031-187934-yfnwt2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=647&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299654/original/file-20191031-187934-yfnwt2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=647&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Seances were a hit in Victorian Britain.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Table_tournante_-_1.png">Louis Le Breton/Wikipedia</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Debunking the bump in the night</h2>
<p>A keen experimenter, Faraday devised <a href="https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20130729-what-makes-the-ouija-board-move">the ideomotor effect</a> to prove that the phenomena had nothing to do with ghosts. Instead, it was the product of the unconscious muscle movements of those participating in the seance.</p>
<p>Scientists from various fields were engaged in “the march of the intellect” – an attempt to diminish the reality of a person’s experiences with ghosts to “tricks of the mind”, or other quirks of human perception. But many Victorians weren’t satisfied. As my <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7722/j.ctt1x7393%5D(https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7722/j.ctt1x7393">own research</a> has found, ghost stories and supernatural folklore continued to circulate widely among urban and rural communities in Victorian Britain.</p>
<p>Even some scientists were curious. The Society for Psychical Research, established in 1882, believed nothing should be beyond the realm of scientific enquiry, including the supernatural. Led by respected scholars such as Henry and Eleanor Sidgwick and physicist William Barrett, members of the society were willing to stake their reputations on their findings. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/299659/original/file-20191031-187925-9sxdpk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/299659/original/file-20191031-187925-9sxdpk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299659/original/file-20191031-187925-9sxdpk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299659/original/file-20191031-187925-9sxdpk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299659/original/file-20191031-187925-9sxdpk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=516&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299659/original/file-20191031-187925-9sxdpk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=516&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/299659/original/file-20191031-187925-9sxdpk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=516&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Michael Faraday was a celebrated theorist of electromagnetism – and even dabbled in the paranormal.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Michael_Faraday#/media/File:Faraday_xmas_detail.jpg">Alexander Blaikley/London Illustrated News</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Various subcommittees investigated <a href="https://www.spr.ac.uk/about/our-history%5D(https://www.spr.ac.uk/about/our-history">hypnotism, telepathy, seances and hauntings</a>). Their work helped expose frauds and they were careful to apply scientific controls to their investigations. But critics complained that their willingness to give credence to such ideas would have a corrupting influence that could only revive a credible belief in ghosts. </p>
<p>As the Pall Mall Gazette put it on October 21, 1882: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>The scientific attitude is so new and unfixed a possession that it can only be preserved by careful abstention from dangerous trains of thought. Even the ablest and most scientific observers, when they have taken the first step by “inquiring”, may sink to the very bottom of the pond before they finish.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Despite the efforts of 19th century scientists, ghosts have never been convincingly drawn into the realm of scientific explanation. Even so, it’s not uncommon to find TV ghost hunters reading words in the squawks and crackles of static on high-tech recording equipment in supposedly haunted houses – the modern equivalent of moving furniture in candlelit drawing rooms. The enchanting appeal of the unknown seems certain to ensure that ghosts live on forever.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/126153/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Karl Bell has previously received AHRC funding for research into British Spiritualism on the Home Front during the First World War.</span></em></p>Sometimes the unknown is more appealing than the truth – and it has kept ghost hunters in business for generations.Karl Bell, Reader in Cultural History, University of PortsmouthLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1210622019-08-01T12:39:52Z2019-08-01T12:39:52ZPseudoscience is taking over social media – and putting us all at risk<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286603/original/file-20190801-169672-1kuyr4j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/fake-news-concept-man-reading-media-1074247067?src=LPjTh0JYUoG6hA-B2dib_Q-1-58&studio=1">One photo/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Search for “climate change” on YouTube and before long you’ll likely find a video that denies it exists. In fact, when it comes to shaping the online conversation around climate change, a <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcomm.2019.00036/full">new study</a> suggests that deniers and conspiracy theorists might hold an edge over those believing in science. Researchers found evidence that most YouTube videos relating to climate change oppose the scientific consensus that it’s primarily caused by human activities.</p>
<p>The study highlights the key role of social media use in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/hard-evidence-how-does-false-information-spread-online-25567">spread of scientific misinformation</a>. And it suggests scientists and those who support them need to be <a href="https://theconversation.com/in-the-era-of-brexit-and-fake-news-scientists-need-to-embrace-social-media-100040">more active</a> in developing creative and compelling ways to communicate their findings. But more importantly, we need to be worried about the effects that maliciously manipulated scientific information can have on our behaviour, individually and as a society.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcomm.2019.00036/full">recent study</a> by Joachim Allgaier of RWTH Aachen University in Germany analysed the content of a randomised sample of 200 YouTube videos related to climate change. He found that a majority (107) of the videos either denied that climate change was caused by humans or claimed that climate change was a conspiracy.</p>
<p>The videos peddling the conspiracy theories received the highest number of views. And those spreading these conspiracy theories used terms like “geoengineering” to make it seem like their claims had a scientific basis when, in fact, they did not.</p>
<h2>Health misinformation</h2>
<p>Climate change is far from the only area where we see a trend for online misinformation about science triumphing over scientifically valid facts. Take an issue like infectious diseases, and perhaps the most well-known example of the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine. Despite large amounts of online information about the vaccine’s safety, false claims that it has harmful effects have <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-07034-4">spread widely</a> and resulted in <a href="https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/over-20-million-children-worldwide-missed-out-measles-vaccine-annually-past-8-years">plummeting levels</a> of vaccination in many countries around the world.</p>
<p>But it’s not just well-known conspiracy theories that are causing a problem. In May 2018, one troublemaker came into his own at the height of the <a href="https://www.who.int/csr/don/07-august-2018-nipah-virus-india/en/">Nipah virus outbreak</a> that eventually claimed 17 lives in the southern Indian state of Kerala. He duplicated the letterhead of the District Medical Officer and spread a message claiming that Nipah was spreading through <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/nipah-chicken-whatsapp-hoax-message-transmission-962065">chicken meat</a>. </p>
<p>In reality, the scientifically established view is that the <a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/nipah-virus">fruit bat</a> is the host for the virus. As the unfounded rumour went viral on WhatsApp in Kerala and neighbouring states like Tamil Nadu, consumers became wary of consuming chicken, which sent the incomes of local <a href="https://www.financialexpress.com/industry/nipah-scare-eats-rs-75-crore-ramadan-chicken-business-in-kerala-tamil-nadu/1203795/">chicken traders</a> into a tailspin.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/hard-evidence-how-does-false-information-spread-online-25567">Hard Evidence: how does false information spread online?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The effects of misinformation surrounding the MMR vaccine and Nipah virus on human behaviour should not be surprising given we know that our memory <a href="http://learnmem.cshlp.org/content/12/4/361.full">is malleable</a>. Our recollection of original facts can be replaced with new, false ones. We also know <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-internet-fuels-conspiracy-theories-but-not-in-the-way-you-might-imagine-98037">conspiracy theories</a> have a powerful appeal as <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0963721417718261">they can help people</a> make sense of events or issues they feel they have no control over. </p>
<p>This problem is complicated further by the personalisation algorithms underlying social media. These tend to feed us content consistent with our beliefs and clicking patterns, helping to <a href="https://theconversation.com/fake-news-why-people-believe-it-and-what-can-be-done-to-counter-it-70013">strengthen the acceptance of misinformation</a>. Someone who is sceptical about climate change might be given an increasing stream of content denying it is caused by humans, making them less likely to take personal action or vote to tackle the issue.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286604/original/file-20190801-169676-jk9ohh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286604/original/file-20190801-169676-jk9ohh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286604/original/file-20190801-169676-jk9ohh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286604/original/file-20190801-169676-jk9ohh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286604/original/file-20190801-169676-jk9ohh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=518&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286604/original/file-20190801-169676-jk9ohh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=518&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286604/original/file-20190801-169676-jk9ohh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=518&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Conspiracy theories appear to explain what we can’t control.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/puppet-businessman-empty-room-leaded-by-1084279346?src=oRlExw41CIOEaY0sTmsC2Q-1-39&studio=1">Ra2Photo/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Further rapid advances in digital technologies will also ensure that misinformation arrives in unexpected formats and with varying levels of sophistication. Duplicating an official’s letterhead or strategically using key words to manipulate online search engines is the tip of the iceberg. The emergence of artificial intelligence-related developments such as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/23/to-fix-the-problem-of-deepfakes-we-must-treat-the-cause-not-the-symptoms">DeepFakes</a> – highly realistic doctored videos – is likely to make it a lot harder to spot misinformation. </p>
<p>So how do we tackle this problem? The challenge is made greater by the fact that simply providing corrective scientific information can <a href="http://web.mit.edu/berinsky/www/files/healthrumors.pdf">reinforce people’s awareness</a> of the falsehoods. We also have to overcome resistance from people’s <a href="https://fbaum.unc.edu/teaching/articles/PolBehavior-2010-Nyhan.pdf">ideological beliefs</a> and biases. </p>
<p>Social media companies are trying to developing institutional mechanisms to contain the spread of misinformation. Responding to the new research, a YouTube spokesperson said: “Since this study was conducted in 2018, we’ve made hundreds of changes to our platform and the results of this study do not accurately reflect the way that YouTube works today … These changes have already reduced views from recommendations of this type of content by 50% in the US.”</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-internet-fuels-conspiracy-theories-but-not-in-the-way-you-might-imagine-98037">The internet fuels conspiracy theories – but not in the way you might imagine</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Other companies have recruited <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jun/08/facebook-advertises-for-fake-news-fact-checkers">fact checkers</a> in large numbers, awarded <a href="https://www.whatsapp.com/research/awards/">research grants</a> to study misinformation to academics (including myself), and search terms for topics where misinformation could have harmful health effects have <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/next-front-in-tech-firms-war-on-misinformation-bad-medical-advice-11550658601">been blocked</a>.</p>
<p>But the continuing prominence of scientific misinformation on social media suggests these measures are not enough. As a result, governments around the world are <a href="https://www.poynter.org/ifcn/anti-misinformation-actions/">taking action</a>, ranging from passing legislation to internet shutdowns, much to the ire of freedom-of-speech activists. </p>
<h2>Scientists need to get involved</h2>
<p>Another possible solution may be to hone people’s ability to think critically so they can tell the difference between actual scientific information and conspiracy theories. For example, a district in Kerala has launched a <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-45140158">data literacy initiative</a> across nearly 150 public schools trying to empower children with the skills to differentiate between authentic and fake information. It’s early days but there is already anecdotal evidence that this can make a difference.</p>
<p>Scientists also need to get more involved in the fight to make sure their work isn’t dismissed or misused, as in the case of terms like “geoengineering” being hijacked by YouTube climate deniers. Conspiracy theories ride on the appeal of certainties – however fake – whereas uncertainty is inherent to the scientific process. But in the case of the scientific consensus on climate change, which sees <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/jul/24/scientific-consensus-on-humans-causing-global-warming-passes-99">up to 99%</a> of climate scientists agreeing that humans are responsible, we have something as close to certainty as science comes.</p>
<p>Scientists need to leverage this agreement to its maximum and communicate to the public using innovative and persuasive strategies. This includes creating <a href="https://theconversation.com/in-the-era-of-brexit-and-fake-news-scientists-need-to-embrace-social-media-100040">social media content</a> of their own to not only shift beliefs but also influence behaviours. Otherwise, their voices, however <a href="https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/politicians-remain-least-trusted-profession-britain">highly trusted</a>, will continue to be drowned out by the frequency and ferocity of content produced by those with no concrete evidence.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/121062/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Santosh Vijaykumar receives funding from WhatsApp to study how older adults grapple with misinformation on WhatsApp during infectious disease outbreaks. </span></em></p>New evidence suggests most YouTube videos on climate change deny its existence.Santosh Vijaykumar, Vice Chancellor's Senior Research Fellow in Digital Health, Northumbria University, NewcastleLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/992722018-07-18T10:42:16Z2018-07-18T10:42:16ZThe brainwashing myth<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228059/original/file-20180717-44079-3glegz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">We'll say someone's brainwashed only when we disagree with their beliefs or actions.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/human-heads-brains-artificial-intelligence-concept-580559923">lolloj/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>More than 40 years ago, my two sisters, Carolyn Layton and Annie Moore, were among those who planned the <a href="https://wrldrels.org/2016/10/08/peoples-temple/">mass deaths in Jonestown</a> on Nov. 18, 1978. </p>
<p>Part of a movement called Peoples Temple, which was led by a charismatic pastor named Jim Jones, they had moved with 1,000 other Americans to the South American nation of Guyana in order to create a communal utopia. Under pressure from concerned relatives and the media, however, they implemented a plan of group murder and suicide. Jonestown is remembered in the phrase “drinking the Kool-Aid,” because more than 900 people died after drinking poison-laced punch. My two sisters and nephew were among those who died. </p>
<p>In the wake of this tragedy, you might think that I would be amenable to the idea that they had been brainwashed. It would absolve their heinous actions and offer an easy explanation for their behavior. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/13/health/brainwashing-mind-control-patty-hearst/index.html">Many argue</a> that people join “cults” – or “new religious movements,” the term scholars prefer – because they’ve been brainwashed. The thinking goes that they’ve undergone some sort of programming that allows others to manipulate them against their will.</p>
<p>How else to explain why people become immersed in fringe groups that seem so alien to their previous, more socially acceptable lives? How else to account for the fact that – in some cases – they’ll even commit crimes?</p>
<p>But <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-label-cult-gets-in-the-way-of-understanding-new-religions-94386">like the word “cult,”</a> the term brainwashing seems to only be applied to groups we disapprove of. We don’t say that soldiers are brainwashed to kill other people; that’s basic training. We don’t say that fraternity members are brainwashed to haze their members; that’s peer pressure. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-label-cult-gets-in-the-way-of-understanding-new-religions-94386">Why the label 'cult' gets in the way of understanding new religions</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><a href="https://furthermoore.weebly.com/">As a scholar of religious studies</a>, I’m disheartened by how casually the word “brainwashing” gets thrown around, whether it’s used to describe <a href="https://www.sfgate.com/entertainment/the-wrap/article/Rose-McGowan-Says-Trump-Voters-Are-Victims-of-12657034.php">a politician’s supporters</a>, or <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/mette-ivie-harrison/are-we-mormons-a-cult_b_7485784.html">individuals who are devoutly religious</a>.</p>
<p>I reject the idea of brainwashing for three reasons: It is pseudoscientific, ignores research-based explanations for human behavior and dehumanizes people by denying their free will.</p>
<h2>No scientific grounding</h2>
<p>Brainwashing is used so frequently to describe religious conversions that it has a certain panache to it, as if it were based in scientific theory.</p>
<p>But brainwashing presents what scientists call an “untestable hypothesis.” In order for a theory to be considered scientifically credible, it must be falsifiable; that is, it must be able to be proven incorrect. For example, as soon as things fall up instead of down, we will know that the theory of gravity is false. </p>
<p>Since we cannot really prove that brainwashing does not exist, it fails to meet the standard criteria of the scientific method.</p>
<p>In addition, there seems to be no way to have a conversation about brainwashing: you either accept it or you don’t. You can’t argue with someone who says “I was brainwashed.” But real science seeks argument and disagreement, as scholars challenge their colleagues’ theories and presuppositions. </p>
<p>Finally, if brainwashing really existed, more people would join and stay in these groups. But <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Making_of_a_Moonie.html?id=zXSsPQAACAAJ">studies have shown</a> that members of new religions generally leave the group within a few years of joining.</p>
<p>Even advocates of brainwashing theories are abandoning the term in the face of such criticism, using more scientific-sounding expressions such as “<a href="http://www.icsahome.com/articles/2012-paul-r--martin-lecture-thought-reform">thought reform</a>” and “<a href="https://culteducation.com/group/798-abusive-controlling-relationships/3260-coercive-persuasion-and-attitude-changes.html">coercive persuasion</a>” in its stead.</p>
<h2>Conversion, conditioning and coercion</h2>
<p>Once we move beyond brainwashing as an explanation for people’s behaviors, we can actually learn quite a bit about why individuals are drawn to new ideas and alternative religions or make choices at odds with their previous lifestyles. </p>
<p>There are at least three scientific, neutral and precise terms that can replace brainwashing.</p>
<p>The first is “conversion,” which describes an individual’s striking change in attitude, emotion or viewpoint. It’s typically used in the context of religious transformation, but it can describe other radical changes – from voting for the “wrong” candidate to joining Earth First! </p>
<p>It can be sudden and dramatic, as in <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-dominic-crossan/paul-and-damascus_b_1348778.html">the case of St. Paul</a>, who had been persecuting the early church but then stopped after supposedly hearing a voice from heaven. Or it can be a slow and gradual process, similar to the way <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/An_Autobiography.html?id=VsMLYjEsyaEC">Mahatma Gandhi</a> came to understand his role and mission as a leader for Indian independence. </p>
<p>We usually think of conversion as a voluntary process. But when we look at accounts of well-respected converts – <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessions_(Augustine)">St. Augustine</a> comes to mind – we find exactly what the philosopher William James <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Varieties_of_Religious_Experience">said we would</a>: Converts begin by being passive recipients of a transcendent, life-changing event. They don’t plan for it; it just happens. But they cannot go back to the way things were before their experience.</p>
<p>Next, there’s conditioning, which refers to the psychological process of learning to behave in a certain way in response to certain stimuli. As we grow up and experience life, we become conditioned by parents, teachers, friends and society to think and feel in certain predictable ways. We get rewarded for some things we do and punished for others. This influences how we behave. There is nothing evil or nefarious about this process.</p>
<p>Studies have shown that many of the people who seek out new religions may be <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283631956_A_critique_of_Brainwashing_claims_about_new_religious_movements">predisposed or conditioned</a> to finding a group that fosters their worldview. </p>
<p>But what about the nice people who, in rare cases, end up doing terrible things after joining a new religious movement? </p>
<p>Again, the process of conditioning seems to offer some explanation. For example, peer pressure has the powerful ability to condition people to conform to specific roles they are assigned. In <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/the-real-lesson-of-the-stanford-prison-experiment">the Stanford Prison Experiment</a>, participants were randomly assigned the role of guard and prisoner – with the guards soon becoming abusive and the inmates becoming passive. Meanwhile, deference to authority, which Stanley Milgram studied in his <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/01/rethinking-one-of-psychologys-most-infamous-experiments/384913/">famous 1961 experiment</a>, may encourage people to do what they know is wrong. In the case of Milgram’s experiment, participants applied what they believed were electric shocks to individuals, even as they heard simulated screams of pain. </p>
<p>And finally, coercion can also help explain why people may act against their own values, even committing crimes on occasion.</p>
<p>If someone is told to do something – and threatened with physical, emotional or spiritual harm if they don’t – it’s coercion. Just because someone carries out an order, it doesn’t mean they agree with it. Prisoners of war <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/true-story-brainwashing-and-how-it-shaped-america-180963400/">may publicly denounce their home country</a> or claim allegiance to the enemy just to survive. When they are released from captivity, however, they revert to their true beliefs. </p>
<p>In other words, coercion – or exhaustion, or hunger – can make people do things they might not otherwise do. We don’t need a theory of thought reform to understand the power of fear.</p>
<h2>A denial of agency</h2>
<p>True believers certainly exist. My sisters fall into that category. They sincerely promoted the cause of the Peoples Temple – no matter how misguided it was under the leadership of Jim Jones – because of their deep commitment to its ideals. This commitment arose from their conversion experiences and their gradual, conditioned acceptance of ethical misbehavior.</p>
<p>I do not consider them brainwashed, however. They made decisions and choices more or less freely. They knew what they were doing. <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-deaths-of-76-branch-davidians-in-april-1993-could-have-been-avoided-so-why-didnt-anyone-care-90816">The same is true for members of the Branch Davidians</a>: They accepted and believed the word of God as interpreted by David Koresh. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228062/original/file-20180717-44097-zklitz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228062/original/file-20180717-44097-zklitz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228062/original/file-20180717-44097-zklitz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228062/original/file-20180717-44097-zklitz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228062/original/file-20180717-44097-zklitz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228062/original/file-20180717-44097-zklitz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228062/original/file-20180717-44097-zklitz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228062/original/file-20180717-44097-zklitz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Bodies of victims of Jonestown mass suicide are loaded from U.S. Army helicopter at Georgetown’s international airport, Nov. 23, 1977.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Watchf-Associated-Press-International-News-Guya-/6f643dcc31fe47c9b807b587d1ed03a5/5/0">AP Photo</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>If brainwashing actually existed, we would expect to see many more dangerous people running around, planning to carry out reprehensible schemes.</p>
<p>Instead, we find that people frequently abandon their beliefs <a href="https://global.oup.com/ushe/product/comprehending-cults-9780195420098?cc=us&lang=en&">as soon as they leave coercive environments</a>. This fact does not address <a href="https://www.benzablocki.net/exit-cost-analysis/">the difficulty of leaving certain groups</a>, whether they’re political parties, religious movements, social clubs or even business organizations. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, people can leave these groups and abandon their beliefs – and do.</p>
<p>Should we consider situational hurdles and peer pressure forms of brainwashing? If that were the case, then everything – and nothing – would constitute mind control.</p>
<p>We have studies that illuminate processes of conversion and conditioning. We have historical examples that demonstrate what people do under compulsion. </p>
<p>The brainwashing explanation ignores this social scientific research. It infantilizes individuals by denying them personal agency and suggesting that they are not responsible for their actions. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/15/nyregion/jurors-reject-brainwashing-defense-in-attempted-murder-trial.html">The courts don’t buy brainwashing</a>. </p>
<p>Why should we?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/99272/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rebecca Moore is the Site Manager for Alternative Considerations of Jonestown and Peoples Temple, a digital archive hosted by San Diego State University.</span></em></p>Forty years ago, Rebecca Moore’s two sisters helped plan the Jonestown massacre. But she refuses to say they were brainwashed, arguing that it prevents us from truly understanding their behavior.Rebecca Moore, Emerita Professor of Religious Studies, San Diego State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/957352018-05-24T10:22:34Z2018-05-24T10:22:34ZPersonality tests with deep-sounding questions provide shallow answers about the ‘true’ you<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/220226/original/file-20180523-51141-s5bwj2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=529%2C98%2C4742%2C3377&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A quirky quiz probably isn't going to tell you much about your innermost essence.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/portrait-smiling-young-woman-covering-her-648726070">StunningArt/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Have you ever clicked on a link like “What does your favorite animal say about you?” wondering what your love of hedgehogs reveals about your psyche? Or filled out a personality assessment to gain new understanding into whether you’re an introverted or extroverted “type”? People love turning to these kinds of personality quizzes and tests on the hunt for deep insights into themselves. People tend to believe they have <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616689495">a “true” and revealing self</a> hidden somewhere deep within, so it’s natural that assessments claiming to unveil it will be appealing. </p>
<p><a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Ep1t9nsAAAAJ&hl=en">As</a> <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=So__A9oAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=sra">psychologists</a>, we noticed something striking about assessments that claim to uncover people’s “true type.” Many of the questions are poorly constructed – their wording can be ambiguous and they often contain forced choices between options that are not opposites. This can be true of BuzzFeed-type quizzes as well as more seemingly sober assessments.</p>
<p>On the other hand, assessments created by trained personality psychologists use questions that are more straightforward to interpret. The most notable example is probably the well-respected <a href="https://ipip.ori.org/newBigFive5broadKey.htm">Big Five Inventory</a>. Rather than sorting people into “types,” it scores people on the established psychological dimensions of openness to new experience, conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness and neuroticism. This simplicity is by design; psychology researchers know that the more respondents struggle to understand the question, the worse the question is.</p>
<p>But the lack of rigor in “type” assessments turns out to be a feature, not a bug, for the general public. What makes tests less valid can ironically make them more interesting. Since most people aren’t trained to think about psychology in a scientifically rigorous way, it stands to reason they also won’t be great at evaluating those assessments. We recently conducted <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550618766409">series of studies</a> to investigate how consumers view these tests. When people try to answer these harder questions, do they think to themselves “This question is poorly written”? Or instead do they focus on its difficulty and think “This question’s deep”? Our results suggest that a desire for deep insight can lead to deep confusion.</p>
<h2>Confusing difficult for deep</h2>
<p>In our first study, we showed people items from both the Big Five and from the Keirsey Temperament Sorter (KTS), a popular “type” assessment that contains many questions we suspected people find comparatively difficult. Our participants rated each item in two ways. First, they rated difficulty. That is, how confusing and ambiguous did they find it? Second, what was its perceived “depth”? In other words, to what extent did they feel the item seemed to be getting at something hidden deep in the unconscious?</p>
<p>Sure enough, not only were these perceptions correlated, the KTS was seen as both more difficult and deeper. In follow-up studies, we experimentally manipulated difficulty. In one study, we modified Big Five items to make them harder to answer like the KTS items, and again we found that participants rated the more difficult versions as “deeper.”</p>
<p>We also noticed that some personality assessments seem to derive their intrigue from having seemingly nothing to do with personality at all. Take <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/agh/this-color-association-test-will-reveal-the-age-you-are-at-h">one BuzzFeed quiz</a>, for example, that asks about which colors people associate with abstract concepts like letters and days of the week and then outputs “the true age of your soul.” Even if people trust BuzzFeed more for entertainment than psychological truths, perhaps they are actually on board with the idea that these difficult, abstract decisions do reveal some deep insights. In fact, that is the entire idea behind <a href="http://www.emory.edu/EMORY_REPORT/erarchive/2001/May/erMay.7/5_7_01lilienfeld.html">classically problematic</a> measures such as the Rorschach, or “ink blot,” test. </p>
<p>In two studies inspired by that BuzzFeed quiz, we found exactly that. We gave people items from purported “personality assessment” checklists. In one study, we assigned half the participants to the “difficult” condition, wherein the assessment items required them to choose which of two colors they associated with abstract concepts, like the letter “M.” In the “easier” condition, respondents were still required to rate colors on how much they associated them with those abstract concepts, but they more simply rated one color at a time instead of choosing between two.</p>
<p>Again, participants rated the difficult version as deeper. Seemingly, the sillier the assessment, the better people think it can read the hidden self.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/220227/original/file-20180524-51121-1e0hdfm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/220227/original/file-20180524-51121-1e0hdfm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/220227/original/file-20180524-51121-1e0hdfm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220227/original/file-20180524-51121-1e0hdfm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220227/original/file-20180524-51121-1e0hdfm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220227/original/file-20180524-51121-1e0hdfm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220227/original/file-20180524-51121-1e0hdfm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/220227/original/file-20180524-51121-1e0hdfm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Complicated or hard-to-parse questions about yourself aren’t going to spring open a shortcut to the true you.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/optical-form-examination-pencil-213521044">Basar/Shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Intuition may steer you wrong</h2>
<p>One of the implications of this research is that people are going to have a hard time leaving behind the bad ideas baked into popular yet unscientific personality assessments. The most notable example is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, which infamously remains quite popular while doing a fairly poor job of assessing personality, due to <a href="https://www.vox.com/2014/7/15/5881947/myers-briggs-personality-test-meaningless">longstanding issues</a> with the <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/give-and-take/201309/goodbye-mbti-the-fad-won-t-die">assessment itself</a> and the long-discredited <a href="https://medium.com/@AdamMGrant/mbti-if-you-want-me-back-you-need-to-change-too-c7f1a7b6970">Jungian theory</a> behind it. Our findings suggest that Myers-Briggs-like assessments that have largely been debunked by experts might persist in part because their formats overlap quite well with people’s intuitions about what will best access the “true self.” </p>
<p>People’s intuitions do them no favors here. Intuitions often <a href="https://www.basicbooks.com/titles/andrew-shtulman/scienceblind/9780465094929/">undermine scientific thinking</a> on topics like physics and biology. Psychology is no different. People arbitrarily divide parts of themselves into “true” and superficial components and seem all too willing to believe in tests that claim to definitively make those distinctions. But the idea of a “true self” doesn’t really work as a scientific concept.</p>
<p>Some people might be stuck in a self-reinforcing yet unproductive line of thought: Personality assessments can cause confusion. That confusion in turn overlaps with intuitions of how they think their deep psychology works, and then they tell themselves the confusion is profound. So intuitions about psychology might be especially pernicious. Following them too closely could lead you to know less about yourself, not more.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/95735/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Few can resist an assessment that promises to reveal your hidden, true self. But new research suggests that people mistakenly believe difficult to answer questions offer deep insights.Randy Stein, Assistant Professor of Marketing, California State Polytechnic University, PomonaAlexander Swan, Assistant Professor of Psychology, Eureka CollegeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/895442018-02-12T10:20:26Z2018-02-12T10:20:26ZThe ‘Mandela Effect’ and how your mind is playing tricks on you<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205142/original/file-20180206-88764-1cctixe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/download/success?src=VLDaNBXMqayf0v-5VDgGJw-1-3">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Have you ever been convinced that something is a particular way only to discover you’ve remembered it all wrong? If so, it sounds like you’ve experienced the phenomenon known as the <a href="http://mandelaeffect.com/about/">Mandela Effect</a>. </p>
<p>This form of collective <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-mandela-effect-and-the-science-of-false-memories-114226">misremembering</a> of common events or details first emerged in 2010, when countless people on the internet falsely remembered Nelson Mandela was dead. It was widely believed he had died in prison during the 1980s. In reality, Mandela was actually freed in 1990 and passed away in 2013 – despite some people’s claims they remember <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/christopherhudspeth/crazy-examples-of-the-mandela-effect-that-will-make-you-ques?utm_term=.loLxA7Bap#.knwOMPK3p">clips of his funeral on TV</a>.</p>
<p>Paranormal consultant Fiona Broome coined the term “<a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/mandela-effect-49471">Mandela Effect</a>” to explain this collective misremembering, and then other examples started popping up all over the internet. For instance, it was wrongly recalled that <a href="https://steemit.com/mandelaeffect/@moneybags73/the-mandela-effect-do-you-remember-c3po-with-a-silver-leg-i-don-t">C-3PO from Star Wars</a> was gold, actually one of his legs is silver. Likewise, <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/christopherhudspeth/crazy-examples-of-the-mandela-effect-that-will-make-you-ques?utm_term=.gko9pb3P2#.svkJDn074">people often wrongly believe</a> that the Queen in Snow White says, “Mirror, mirror on the wall”. The correct phrase is “magic mirror on the wall”. </p>
<p>Broome explains the Mandela Effect via pseudoscientific theories. She claims that differences arise from <a href="https://www.space.com/18811-multiple-universes-5-theories.html">movement between parallel realities</a> (the multiverse). This is based on the theory that within each universe alternative versions of events and objects exist. </p>
<p>Broome also draws comparisons between existence and the <a href="http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Holodeck">holodeck of the USS Enterprise</a> from Star Trek. The holodeck was a virtual reality system, which created recreational experiences. By her explanation, memory errors are software glitches. This is explained as being similar to the film The Matrix. </p>
<p>Other theories propose that the Mandela Effect evidences changes in history caused by time travellers. Then there are the claims that distortions result from spiritual attacks linked to Satan, black magic or witchcraft. But although appealing to many, <a href="https://www.theodysseyonline.com/new-perspective-is-our-reality-what-we-think-it-is">these theories</a> are not scientifically testable. </p>
<h2>Where’s the science?</h2>
<p>Psychologists explain the Mandela Effect via memory and social effects – particularly false memory. This involves mistakenly recalling events or experiences that have not occurred, or distortion of existing memories. The unconscious manufacture of fabricated or misinterpreted memories is called confabulation. In everyday life <a href="https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Confabulation">confabulation is relatively common</a>. </p>
<p>False memories occur in a number of ways. For instance, the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkzaDIM9sF8">Deese-Roediger and McDermott paradigm</a> demonstrates how learning a list of words that contain closely related items – such as “bed” and “pillow” – produces false recognition of related, but non presented words – such as “sleep”. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205144/original/file-20180206-88799-zjmccm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205144/original/file-20180206-88799-zjmccm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205144/original/file-20180206-88799-zjmccm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205144/original/file-20180206-88799-zjmccm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205144/original/file-20180206-88799-zjmccm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205144/original/file-20180206-88799-zjmccm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205144/original/file-20180206-88799-zjmccm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">There’s a theory online that nuclear research experiments caused the world to shift into an alternate reality where Donald Trump became president.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/download/success?src=VLDaNBXMqayf0v-5VDgGJw-1-1">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Memory inaccuracy can also arise from what’s known as “source monitoring errors”. These are instances where people fail to distinguish between <a href="http://www.eruptingmind.com/can-you-trust-your-memory-when-remembering-lists-of-words/">real and imagined even</a>. US professor of psychology, Jim Coan, demonstrated how easily this can happen using the “<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_in_the_mall_technique">Lost in the Mall</a>” procedure. </p>
<p>This saw Coan give his family members short narratives describing childhood events. One, about his brother getting lost in a shopping mall, was invented. Not only did Coan’s brother believe the event occurred, he also added additional detail. When cognitive psychologist and expert on human memory, Elizabeth Loftus, applied the technique to larger samples, 25% of participants <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTF7FUAoGWw">failed to recognise the event was false</a>.</p>
<h2>Incorrect recall</h2>
<p>When it comes to the Mandela Effect, many examples are attributable to so called “schema driven errors”. Schemas are organised “packets” of knowledge that direct memory. In this way, schemas facilitate understanding of material, but can produce distortion. </p>
<p>Frederic Bartlett outlined this process in his 1932 book <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Remembering.html?id=WG5ZcHGTrm4C">Remembering</a>. Barlett read the Canadian Indian folktale “War of the Ghosts” to participants. He found that listeners omitted unfamiliar details and transformed information to make it more understandable. </p>
<p>This process is called “effort after meaning” and occurs in real world situations too. For instance, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00f8n47">research has previously shown</a> how when participants’ recall the contents of a psychologist’s office they tend to remember the consistent items such as bookshelves, and omit the inconsistent items – like a picnic basket.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205148/original/file-20180206-88803-1sowiwi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/205148/original/file-20180206-88803-1sowiwi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205148/original/file-20180206-88803-1sowiwi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205148/original/file-20180206-88803-1sowiwi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205148/original/file-20180206-88803-1sowiwi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205148/original/file-20180206-88803-1sowiwi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/205148/original/file-20180206-88803-1sowiwi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The pseudoscientific belief puts differences between memories and the real world down to glitches caused by time travel.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.pexels.com/photo/sky-lights-space-dark-2154/">Pexels</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Schema theory explains why <a href="http://www.southampton.ac.uk/%7Esvs1/1005/everydaymem.html">previous research</a> shows that when the majority of participants are asked to draw a clock face from memory, they mistakenly draw IV rather than IIII. Clocks often use IIII because it is more attractive. </p>
<p>Other examples of the Mandela Effect are the mistaken belief that Uncle Pennybags (Monopoly man) wears a monocle, and that the product title “KitKat” contains a hyphen (“Kit-Kat”). But this is simply explained by <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/christopherhudspeth/crazy-examples-of-the-mandela-effect-that-will-make-you-ques?utm_term=.auqZvOzbW#.dt2nrXZ27">over-generalisation of spelling knowledge</a>.</p>
<h2>Back to reality</h2>
<p>Frequently reported errors can then become part of collective reality. And the internet can reinforce this process by circulating false information. For example, simulations of the 1997 Princess Diana car crash are regularly mistaken for real footage. </p>
<p>In this way then, the majority of Mandela Effects are attributable to memory errors and social misinformation. The fact that a lot of the inaccuracies are trivial, suggests they result from selective attention or faulty inference. </p>
<p>This is not to say that the Mandela Effect is not explicable in terms of the multiverse. Indeed, the notion of parallel universes is consistent with <a href="https://www.space.com/32728-parallel-universes.html">the work of quantum physicists</a>. But until the existence of alternative realities is established, psychological theories appear much more plausible.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>More on articles about <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/memory-162?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKengagement">memory</a>, written by researchers:</em></p>
<ul>
<li><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/the-strange-science-of-odour-memory-74403?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKengagement">The strange science of odour memory</a></em></li>
<li><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/can-training-your-working-memory-make-you-smarter-we-reviewed-the-evidence-74322?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKengagement">Can training your working memory make you smarter? We reviewed the evidence</a></em></li>
<li><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/why-we-become-more-forgetful-with-age-and-what-you-can-do-about-it-70102?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKengagement">Why we become more forgetful with age – and what you can do about it</a></em></li>
</ul><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/89544/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Proof of time travel, false memories or a parallel universe? A look at the wacky world of the ‘Mandela Effect’.Neil Dagnall, Reader in Applied Cognitive Psychology, Manchester Metropolitan UniversityKen Drinkwater, Senior Lecturer and Researcher in Cognitive and Parapsychology, Manchester Metropolitan UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/842232017-09-20T14:17:37Z2017-09-20T14:17:37ZThe peer review system has flaws. But it’s still a barrier to bad science<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/186593/original/file-20170919-22701-1l6j0rq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Research must be carefully scrutinised by peer reviewers to ensure its veracity.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Nattapat Jitrungruengnij/Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Democracy and scientific peer review have something in common: it’s a “system full of problems but the least worst we have”. That’s the view of <a href="http://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/category/columnists/richard-smith/">Richard Smith</a>, a medical doctor and former editor of the illustrious <a href="http://www.bmj.com/">British Medical Journal</a>. </p>
<p>Wiley, a large academic publishing house, <a href="https://authorservices.wiley.com/Reviewers/journal-reviewers/what-is-peer-review/index.html">says that</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Peer review is designed to assess the validity, quality and often the originality of articles for publication. Its ultimate purpose is to maintain the integrity of science by filtering out invalid or poor quality articles.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Another publishing house, Springer, <a href="https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/editors/peer-review/32888">describes</a> peer reviewers as being “almost like intellectual gatekeepers to the journal as they provide an objective assessment of a paper and determine if it is useful enough to be published”. </p>
<p>The peer review system has received a fair amount of <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1420798/">negative press</a> in recent years. It has been criticised largely because it is not particularly transparent and depends on a small number of peer reviews, an approach that can lend itself to cronyism. In addition it depends on trust: trust that reviewers will be fair and are willing to put sufficient time into a critical review. In this era of overworked academics being asked to do ever more, “sufficient time” is in short supply.</p>
<p>Despite these concerns, I agree with Smith: peer review is the “least worst” system available for assessing academic research and maintaining science’s integrity. Having worked in academia for the past 30 years and currently serving as Vice President of the <a href="https://www.assaf.org.za/">Academy of Science of South Africa</a>, I believe peer review and the publication process is perhaps more important than ever in this era of “fake news” – and not just for scientists and academics. Thorough review and robust pre and post publication engagement by a scientist’s peers are crucial if the average person in the street is to navigate a world full of pseudo-science.</p>
<h2>Scientific truth is built on replication</h2>
<p>One classic case of scientific fraud was the “<a href="http://www2.clarku.edu/%7EPiltdown/map_report_finds/pilt_man_discover.html">Piltdown man</a>” in 1912. Bone fragments supposed to be from an archaeological site in England were presented as a human ancestor. The alleged discovery of an early hominid in England was comfortable for British and European scientists at the time as it suggested that humans evolved in Europe. But this report was the source of controversy for many years. </p>
<p>While the Piltdown man has been recognised as a hoax since 1953, <a href="http://rsos.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/3/8/160328">DNA evidence</a> of the fact that the bones come from both an orangutan and probably two human specimens was only recently published. </p>
<p>This case illustrates both the strengths and weakness of the scientific publishing system. The hoax was possibly published because it fitted with the theories of the time. The report was, however, hugely controversial; was re-examined and with time was shown by scientists to be fraudulent. </p>
<p>This is a good starting point for understanding how real science works; how research is peer reviewed and critically examined before what is reported can be considered scientific fact.</p>
<p>Perfect science is never based on a single publication. Each publication is essentially a hypothesis: it will be read by other researchers, who will try to repeat or adapt what was done and then publish their own findings.</p>
<p>The peer review system is more complex than a reviewer just rejecting or accepting a manuscript. Quite often a reviewer suggests other experiments that authors have overlooked or different interpretations for some of the data. This means reviewers add significantly to improving the research and analysis that is performed. </p>
<p>There is no question that the reviews that I receive from higher impact factor journals are, on average, more critical and more useful. The impact factor is <a href="https://www.une.edu.au/library/support/eskills-plus/mastering-the-academic-literature/journal-quality">calculated</a> “by dividing the number of current citations to articles published [in the journal] in the two previous years by the total number of articles published in the two previous years”.</p>
<p>In fact in some cases a strong review will send me and my collaborators back to the laboratory and in so doing significantly strengthen our research. The amazing thing about this is that no fee is asked for these reviews. Yet scientists across the world do them willingly.</p>
<p>So scientific truth is based on a body of research which has been tried and tested by many researchers over time. You might ask, then, what value peer review offers – since, over time, an article that was found suitable for publication and further debate by peer reviewers may be debunked.</p>
<h2>Why do we need peer review?</h2>
<p>Peer review provides a filtering system. Studies that are not well conceived or performed will <a href="https://www.editage.com/insights/most-common-reasons-for-journal-rejection">not be published</a>. They will be filtered out either by a journal’s editor or the reviewers. This means that what appears in the scientific literature is more likely to be of a higher quality. Readers of the peer reviewed literature know that it has been subjected to some level of critique. It is not merely the authors’ opinion that what’s being proposed in a particular article is the truth.</p>
<p>Editors and reviewers of peer review journals demand a particular style and level of experimental rigour. Results are substantiated with graphs, diagrams and in some cases photographs. Experiments are always repeated at least once and sometimes more often. Data is subjected to analysis and in some cases statistical methods are used to prove significance. </p>
<p>But how can the quality of a journal be measured in the first place?</p>
<p>A quick Google search throws up many hundreds of scientific journals. Many of these are likely to be <a href="http://beallslist.weebly.com">predatory</a>, charging authors publication fees without providing the sorts of publishing and editing services offered by legitimate journals.</p>
<p>An ordinary reader should find out which association, society or organisation publishes the journal. Alternatively, take a look at the editorial board.</p>
<p>Respected scientists do not link their names to journals they do not respect. Any respected scientist in a discipline knows which are the “good” journals – a decision they make by looking at the quality of the science in such publications.</p>
<p>Next time you read some interesting report or scientific news it’s worth using the internet to check to see if the report is in fact supported by peer reviewed literature that meets these standards. At the very least do this before you share it on Facebook and add to the pseudo-science that already exists.</p>
<h2>The best system for now</h2>
<p>Until such time as there is a better system, peer review and the subsequent publication process with experimental repetition is the only source of substantiated evidence available. Similar to democracy we all need to understand its strengths and weaknesses.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/84223/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Brenda Wingfield receives funding from National Research Foundation, Tree Protection Co-operative Programme and is vice president of ASSAf.</span></em></p>Scientific truth is based on a body of research which has been tried and tested by many researchers over time. Peer review filters the good science from the bad.Brenda Wingfield, Vice President of the Academy of Science of South Africa and DST-NRF SARChI chair in Fungal Genomics, Professor of Genetics, University of PretoriaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/838982017-09-17T10:43:28Z2017-09-17T10:43:28ZRacism is behind outlandish theories about Africa’s ancient architecture<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/185641/original/file-20170912-19562-14y394t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=793%2C1491%2C4095%2C2405&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The pyramids of Giza on the outskirts of Cairo, Egypt.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mohamed Abd El Ghany/Reuters</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Some of the most impressive buildings and cities ever made by humans can be found in Africa: the ruined city of <a href="http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/364">Great Zimbabwe</a>, <a href="https://www.sanparks.org/parks/mapungubwe/">Mapungubwe</a> in South Africa, Kenya’s <a href="http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/5501/">Gedi Ruins</a> and <a href="http://www.ancient.eu/Meroe/">Meroe</a> in Sudan. Perhaps the most awe-inspiring of these are the last remaining of the <a href="http://www.ancient.eu/The_Seven_Wonders/">Seven Wonders of the Ancient World</a>, the <a href="https://www.livescience.com/32616-how-were-the-egyptian-pyramids-built-.html">Great Pyramid of Giza</a>, in Egypt.</p>
<p>This should come as no surprise. Africa has an extensive archaeological record, extending as far back as 3.3 million years ago when the <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v521/n7552/full/nature14464.html">first-ever stone tool</a> was made in what is today Kenya. The continent’s cultural complexity and diversity is well established; it is home to the world’s oldest-known <a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/334/6053/219">pieces of art</a>. And, of course, it is the birth place of modern humans’ ancient ancestors, <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v546/n7657/full/nature22336.html"><em>Homo sapiens</em></a>.</p>
<p>Despite all this evidence, some people still refuse to believe that anyone from Africa (or anywhere in what is today considered the developing world) could possibly have created and constructed the Giza pyramids or other ancient masterpieces. Instead, they credit <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/egyptians/pyramidology_01.shtml">ancient astronauts, extraterrestrials or time travellers as the real builders</a>. </p>
<p>Well, you may ask, so what? Who cares if relatively few people don’t believe the ancient Egyptians built the pyramids? What’s the harm? Actually, there <em>is</em> great harm: firstly, these people try to prove their theories by travelling the world and desecrating ancient artefacts. Secondly, they perpetuate and give air to the racist notion that only Europeans – white people – ever were and ever will be capable of such architectural feats. </p>
<h2>A threat to world heritage</h2>
<p><a href="http://www.news.com.au/why-did-two-german-hobbyists-deface-a-cartouche-of-khufu-inside-the-great-pyramid-and-what-does-it-have-to-do-with-atlantis/news-story/7db71b6e1e74976cdbe7736c0e5af4c4">In 2014</a> two German pseudo-scientists set out to “prove” that academics were concealing the Giza pyramids’ “real” origin. To do so, they chiselled off a piece of one of the pyramids – of course, without authorisation, so they could “analyse” it.</p>
<p>And earlier in 2017 scientists from the World Congress on Mummy Studies in South America published a communique on their <a href="https://www.facebook.com/wcoms/posts/804089006431344:0">Facebook page</a> to draw attention to the raiding of Nazca graves for a pseudo-scientific research programme called the <a href="https://www.the-alien-project.com/en/">Alien project</a>. It insists that aliens rather than ancient Peruvians were responsible for the famous geoglyphs called the Nazca Lines, despite <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/08/how-to-fake-an-alien-mummy/535251/">all the evidence</a> to the contrary.</p>
<p>Such incidents exemplify the threats to developing nations’ cultural heritage. Conservation authorities around the world must spend a great deal of money to protect and restore unique pieces of heritage, and to guard them against vandalism. For instance, the most recent overhaul planned for the Giza site – back in 2008 – was estimated at a cost of <a href="http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/en/originals/2016/03/egypt-pyramid-military-tourism-complaints-project.html">USD$45 million</a>.</p>
<p>These are not wealthy nations, as a rule, and it costs money they often don’t have to repair the damage done by, among others, pseudo-scientists.</p>
<h2>Racism and colonial attitudes</h2>
<p>A series of stone circles in South Africa’s Mpumalanga province provides an excellent example of the other problem with pseudo-archaeologists. Some people genuinely believe that these structures were designed by aliens. They scoff at scientific research that <a href="http://witspress.co.za/catalogue/forgotten-world/">proves</a> the stone circles were made by the Koni people using ropes, sticks and wood. They will not even entertain the notion that ancient African tribes could be responsible.</p>
<p>But the same people have no problem believing that medieval Europeans built the continent’s magnificent cathedrals using only ropes, sticks and wood. They dismiss scientific research that <a href="https://www.livescience.com/32616-how-were-the-egyptian-pyramids-built-.html">overwhelmingly proves</a> ancient Africans’ prowess, but insist the documents which contain evidence of Europeans’ construction processes are beyond reproach.</p>
<p>Why is it <a href="http://www.nationalgeographic.com/travel/travel-interests/arts-and-culture/ancient-sites-built-by-aliens/">so hard</a> for some to acknowledge that ancient non-European civilisations like the Aztecs, people from Easter Island, ancient Egyptians or Bantu-speakers from southern Africa could create intricate structures?</p>
<p>The answer is unfortunately as simple as it seems: it boils down to <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/08/how-to-fake-an-alien-mummy/535251/">profound racism</a> and a feeling of white superiority that emanates from the rotting corpse of colonialism.</p>
<p>Colonial powers saw their “subjects” in Africa, South America and Southeast Asia as exotic, fascinating – but ultimately primitive.</p>
<p>An increasing knowledge and understanding of the archaeological record mostly dispelled these notions. But for some, and until nowadays, it seems unthinkable that ancient non-European societies have been resourceful and creative enough to erect such monuments. So, the thinking went, conventional science must have been missing or hiding something: ancient astronauts, aliens, or the lost civilisation of Atlantis. Even some <a href="https://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/aegyp/article/view/40164/33823">mainstream scholars</a> have dabbled in this thinking. </p>
<h2>Telling the truth</h2>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/185797/original/file-20170913-20570-upk24i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/185797/original/file-20170913-20570-upk24i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/185797/original/file-20170913-20570-upk24i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/185797/original/file-20170913-20570-upk24i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/185797/original/file-20170913-20570-upk24i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/185797/original/file-20170913-20570-upk24i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/185797/original/file-20170913-20570-upk24i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/185797/original/file-20170913-20570-upk24i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The ancient city of Meroe.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mohamed Nureldin Abdallah/Reuters</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The internet and social media has given these modern conspiracy junkies a perfect platform to share their theories. They try to make others believe that scientists are hiding “the truth” about ancient monuments. Sometimes they even succeed. </p>
<p>There is a risk that they will drown out quality knowledge and science with their colourful, outlandish theories. When such bizarre theories emerge, it can water down people’s understanding and appreciation of Africa’s architectural and cultural heritage. </p>
<p>At the same time, these theories can prevent awareness about Africa’s rich heritage from developing. The heirs of the real builders may never learn about their ancestors’ remarkable achievements.</p>
<p>Scientists have a crucial role to play in turning the tide on such harmful theories. Those of us who are doing ongoing research around the continent’s architectural and fossil record should be sharing our findings in a way that engages ordinary people. </p>
<p>We must show them just how awe-inspiring structures like Great Zimbabwe, Meroe and the Giza Pyramids are – not because they were created by some alien race, but because they are living proof of ancient societies’ ingenuity.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/83898/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Julien Benoit receives funding from The Claude Leon Foundation; PAST and its Scatterlings projects; the National Research Foundation of South Africa; and the DST-NRF Centre of Excellence in Palaeosciences (CoE in Palaeosciences).</span></em></p>The belief that ancient Egyptians needed help from supernatural beings to built the Giza pyramids relies, unavoidably, on racism and colonial attitudes.Julien Benoit, Postdoc in Vertebrate Palaeontology, University of the WitwatersrandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/651602017-01-03T20:13:53Z2017-01-03T20:13:53ZHow to quickly spot dodgy science<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/150058/original/image-20161214-18876-es15do.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Is that a black hole, or a hole in their data?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">NASA Goddard Space Flight Center</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>I haven’t got time for science, or at least not all of it. I cannot read <a href="http://esoads.eso.org/cgi-bin/nph-abs_connect?db_key=AST&db_key=PRE&qform=AST&arxiv_sel=astro-ph&sim_query=YES&ned_query=YES&adsobj_query=YES&aut_logic=AND&obj_logic=OR&author=&object=&start_mon=1&start_year=2015&end_mon=12&end_year=2015&ttl_logic=OR&title=&txt_logic=OR&text=&nr_to_return=200&start_nr=1&jou_pick=ALL&ref_stems=ApJ%2C+A%26A%2C+AJ%2C+MNRAS%2C+PASA%2C+PASP%2C+PASJ&data_and=ALL&group_and=ALL&start_entry_day=&start_entry_mon=&start_entry_year=&end_entry_day=&end_entry_mon=&end_entry_year=&min_score=&sort=CITATIONS&data_type=SHORT&aut_syn=YES&ttl_syn=YES&txt_syn=YES&aut_wt=1.0&obj_wt=1.0&ttl_wt=0.3&txt_wt=3.0&aut_wgt=YES&obj_wgt=YES&ttl_wgt=YES&txt_wgt=YES&ttl_sco=YES&txt_sco=YES&version=1">9,000</a> astrophysics papers every year. No way. </p>
<p>And I have little patience for bad science, which gets more media attention than it deserves. Even the bad science is overwhelming. <a href="http://retractionwatch.com/2016/03/24/retractions-rise-to-nearly-700-in-fiscal-year-2015-and-psst-this-is-our-3000th-post/">700 papers are retracted annually</a>, and that’s a gross underestimate of the bad science in circulation. </p>
<p>I, like most scientists, filter what I read using a few tricks for quickly rejecting bad science. Each trick isn’t foolproof, but in combination they’re rather useful. They can help identify bad science in just minutes rather than hours. </p>
<h2>Okay, this looks bad</h2>
<p>Good science is often meticulous and somewhat anxious. You discover something new or find something unexpected, and frankly you worry a lot about screwing up. Identifying and addressing what could plausibly go wrong, and then writing that up succinctly, takes time. Lots of time. Months. Even years. </p>
<p>If you’re taking the time to do meticulous science, why not take the time to prepare a good manuscript? Make nice-looking figures, proofread it a couple of times, and the like. It seems obvious enough, which is why a sloppy manuscript or poor grammar can be a warning sign of bad science. </p>
<p>Recently, <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.03031">Ermanno Borra and Eric Trottier</a> claimed to have detected “<a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.03031">signals probably from extraterrestrial intelligence</a>”. I thought this was far-fetched, but still worth looking at the <a href="https://arxiv.org/pdf/1610.03031v1.pdf">paper preprint</a>. An immediate red flag for me was some blurry graphs, and figures with captions that weren’t on the same page. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"786034462601555968"}"></div></p>
<p>Was my caution justified? Well, as I dug into the paper more there were other warning signs. For example, the results relied on Fourier analysis, a mathematical method that can be powerful but is also notorious for picking up <a href="https://seti.berkeley.edu/bl_sdss_seti_2016.pdf">artefacts from scientific instruments and data processing</a>. </p>
<p>Furthermore, the surprising conclusions relied on a tiny subset of data, and there was <a href="https://seti.berkeley.edu/bl_sdss_seti_2016.pdf">no attempt to confirm</a> the conclusions with additional observations. If they were being meticulous, wouldn’t they have taken the time to collect more data and properly format their manuscript? I’m very sceptical of Borra and Trottier’s aliens, <a href="https://seti.berkeley.edu/bl_sdss_seti_2016.pdf">as are many of my colleagues</a>. </p>
<p>Of course, there are exceptions to good-looking good science. The announcement of the Higgs boson, which featured fantastic science, included slide designs that did not impress Vincent Connare, the creator of Comic Sans. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"220421676020678656"}"></div></p>
<p>To be honest, I’m with Connare on the <a href="http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/4/3136652/cern-scientists-comic-sans-higgs-boson">slides</a>. However, this is a reminder that tricks for quickly flagging bad science are imperfect shortcuts, not absolute rules. </p>
<h2>Obviously</h2>
<p>“That’s obvious, why didn’t someone think of that before?” </p>
<p>Well, perhaps someone did.</p>
<p>It has recently been claimed that the <a href="http://www.nature.com/articles/srep35596">expansion of the universe may not be accelerating</a>, which seems at odds with some <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2011/">Nobel Prizewinning research</a>. That claim relies on a statistical analysis of supernova data. However, such analyses are nothing new. </p>
<p>Enter keywords into a <a href="http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-abs_connect?db_key=AST&db_key=PRE&qform=AST&arxiv_sel=astro-ph&arxiv_sel=cond-mat&arxiv_sel=cs&arxiv_sel=gr-qc&arxiv_sel=hep-ex&arxiv_sel=hep-lat&arxiv_sel=hep-ph&arxiv_sel=hep-th&arxiv_sel=math&arxiv_sel=math-ph&arxiv_sel=nlin&arxiv_sel=nucl-ex&arxiv_sel=nucl-th&arxiv_sel=physics&arxiv_sel=quant-ph&arxiv_sel=q-bio&sim_query=YES&ned_query=YES&adsobj_query=YES&aut_logic=OR&obj_logic=OR&author=&object=&start_mon=&start_year=&end_mon=&end_year=&ttl_logic=AND&title=supernova+cosmology&txt_logic=OR&text=&nr_to_return=200&start_nr=1&jou_pick=ALL&ref_stems=&data_and=ALL&group_and=ALL&start_entry_day=&start_entry_mon=&start_entry_year=&end_entry_day=&end_entry_mon=&end_entry_year=&min_score=&sort=CITATIONS&data_type=SHORT&aut_syn=YES&ttl_syn=YES&txt_syn=YES&aut_wt=1.0&obj_wt=1.0&ttl_wt=0.3&txt_wt=3.0&aut_wgt=YES&obj_wgt=YES&ttl_wgt=YES&txt_wgt=YES&ttl_sco=YES&txt_sco=YES&version=1">search engine</a>, and you find many previous studies, but without the unexpected conclusions. That’s a red flag right there.</p>
<p>So what happened? Well, one can study up on supernovae or cosmology, but there are experts on Twitter providing succinct explanations and informed responses. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"790693490145370113"}"></div></p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"790844700840202240"}"></div></p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"790859922720247808"}"></div></p>
<p>In plain English, you can only claim that evidence for the accelerating expansion of the universe is marginal if you make make incorrect assumptions about supernova properties and brush aside other key observations. And thus facepalm. </p>
<p>Cosmologist Tamara Davis has <a href="https://theconversation.com/relax-the-expansion-of-the-universe-is-still-accelerating-67691">noted</a> that such omissions, accompanied by emphasis on a contrarian conclusion, tend to be misleading spin. Unfortunately, such omissions and erroneous assumptions <a href="https://theconversation.com/no-we-arent-heading-into-a-mini-ice-age-44677">turn up elsewhere too</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/150042/original/image-20161214-18885-14b9l6d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/150042/original/image-20161214-18885-14b9l6d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/150042/original/image-20161214-18885-14b9l6d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150042/original/image-20161214-18885-14b9l6d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150042/original/image-20161214-18885-14b9l6d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150042/original/image-20161214-18885-14b9l6d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150042/original/image-20161214-18885-14b9l6d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150042/original/image-20161214-18885-14b9l6d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Did they just brush aside two decades of cosmology?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Paramout</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Rank Journals</h2>
<p>You may be aware that some scientific journals come with a certain prestige. There are journal rankings, which typically place the journals <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/index.html">Nature</a> and <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/">Science</a> near the top, and university rankings often use papers in prestigious journals as <a href="http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100303/full/464016a.html">a proxy for quality</a>.</p>
<p>I don’t care much for journal rankings myself. Nature and Science chase blockbuster results, but this leads to them publishing a few too many wrong and <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/05/science-retracts-gay-marriage-paper-without-agreement-lead-author-lacour">even fraudulent results</a>. For example, the contrarian supernova paper was published in <a href="http://www.nature.com/articles/srep35596">Nature’s Scientific Reports</a>, which is an online, open access, multidisciplinary journal that is published by the same group as Nature.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/150055/original/image-20161214-18879-1yx1nl4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/150055/original/image-20161214-18879-1yx1nl4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/150055/original/image-20161214-18879-1yx1nl4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=245&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150055/original/image-20161214-18879-1yx1nl4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=245&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150055/original/image-20161214-18879-1yx1nl4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=245&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150055/original/image-20161214-18879-1yx1nl4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=308&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150055/original/image-20161214-18879-1yx1nl4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=308&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/150055/original/image-20161214-18879-1yx1nl4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=308&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">How do you tell which of these journal articles can be trusted?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>While I don’t care for journal rankings, I do care about <a href="http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/rank#british-1-2-3">rank</a> journals. If you submit your research to a decent journal, you have to assume you will (or could) get a meticulous editor and referee. That should force you to take some care with your research. However, if you know your paper will be accepted without proper peer review, then anything goes. </p>
<p>University of Colorado librarian <a href="https://scholarlyoa.com/about/">Jeffrey Beall</a> maintains a list of “<a href="https://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/">predatory publishers</a>” (<a href="http://archive.fo/6EByy">archived version here</a> if site is offline), which includes vanity academic publishers that provide a veneer of peer review. Effectively, it is Beall’s list of rank journals, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/vanity-and-predatory-academic-publishers-are-corrupting-the-pursuit-of-knowledge-45490">I treat papers in those journals with suspicion</a>. </p>
<p>So I wasn’t too surprised when a journal on Beall’s list published a paper promoting the <a href="http://retractionwatch.com/2016/07/18/author-loses-2nd-paper-on-supposed-dangers-of-chemtrails/">chemtrails conspiracy theory</a>. And I wasn’t surprised to find that the <a href="https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-j-marvin-herndons-geoengineering-articles-in-current-science-india-and-ijerph.t6456/">paper had serious failings</a>. For better and worse, my cynicism is justified all too often.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>This article expresses the individual views of the author, Michael Brown, and should not be considered representative of an official position from the Monash University School of Physics and Astronomy.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/65160/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michael J. I. Brown receives research funding from the Australian Research Council and Monash University, and has developed space-related titles for Monash University's MWorld educational app.
</span></em></p>There are a few red flags to look out for when reading about new scientific discoveries that can help you spot dodgy or unreliable work.Michael J. I. Brown, Associate professor, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/656612016-09-19T14:37:27Z2016-09-19T14:37:27ZA sixth sense? How we can tell that eyes are watching us<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/138280/original/image-20160919-11108-1rp8vm1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">It's easy to tell the direction of the human gaze.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Laurinemily at English Wikipedia</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>We’ve all had that feeling that somebody is watching us – even if we’re not looking directly at their eyes. Sometimes we even experience a feeling of being watched by someone completely outside our field of vision. But how can we explain this phenomenon without resorting to pseudoscientific explanations like extrasensory perception (or a “sixth sense”)? </p>
<p>The human fascination with eyes lies at the heart of the issue. Eyes are the window into the soul, goes the saying. And it’s no wonder we’re so interested in them – the human brain is highly tuned to lock onto the gaze of others. It’s <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2858100">been suggested</a> that there’s a widespread neural network in the brain just dedicated to the processing of gaze. Scientists have already identified a specialised group of neurons in the macaque brain that fire specifically when a monkey is <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2858100">under the direct gaze</a> of another. </p>
<p>We also appear to be wired for gaze perception. The mechanism that detects eyes and shifts our attention towards them may be innate – newborns just two to five days old <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0163638301000376">prefer staring at faces with direct gaze</a>, for example, (over averted gaze).</p>
<p>It’s not just our brains that are specialised to draw us to the gaze of others – our eyes are also exceptionally formed to catch attention and easily reveal the direction of gaze. Indeed, our eye structure is <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11322803">distinct from almost all other species</a>. The area of our eye surrounding our pupil (the sclera) is very large and completely white. This makes it very easy to discern the direction of someone’s gaze. In many animals, by contrast, the pupil takes up a lot of the eye, or the sclera is darker. This is thought to be an adaptation to camouflage the eye in predators – cleverly hiding the direction of gaze from potential prey. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/138278/original/image-20160919-11095-71ahat.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/138278/original/image-20160919-11095-71ahat.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/138278/original/image-20160919-11095-71ahat.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/138278/original/image-20160919-11095-71ahat.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/138278/original/image-20160919-11095-71ahat.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/138278/original/image-20160919-11095-71ahat.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/138278/original/image-20160919-11095-71ahat.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">It can be hard to tell exactly where a cat is looking.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.pexels.com/photo/animal-pet-fur-head-33537/">Pixabay</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But why is gaze so important that it needs all this specialised processing? Basically, eyes provide us with insights into when something meaningful is happening. Shifts in attention from another person are able to, almost reflexively <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10652522">redirect our attention</a> in line with their gaze. Our heightened attention to gaze is thought to have evolved to support cooperative interactions between humans, and is argued to form the foundation for many of our more complex social skills.</p>
<p>Disturbances of normal gaze processing are seen across a wide range of conditions. For example, people on the autistic spectrum spend less time in general <a href="http://www.nature.com/tp/journal/v5/n2/full/tp2014146a.html">fixating on the eyes of others</a>. They also have more trouble extracting information from eyes, such as emotion or intentions, and are less able to tell when someone is looking directly at them. On the other extreme, highly socially anxious people tend to <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0887618508000972">fixate on eyes more</a> than those with low anxiety, even though they show increased physiological fear reactions when under the direct gaze of another.</p>
<p>You may not realise it, but eye gaze affects something so primitive as our psychological reactions to other people. It is a large cue in establishing social dominance. Also, here’s a tip: direct gaze makes people appear <a href="http://pec.sagepub.com/content/45/8/875.full.pdf+html">more trustworthy and attractive</a> (you’re welcome). This also seems to apply to animals. One study suggested that dogs <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0082686">may have evolved</a> to adaptively react to our gaze preferences. It found that dogs in a shelter that gaze at humans while furrowing their inner brows (momentarily making their eyes look larger) get adopted significantly faster than dogs that didn’t. </p>
<p>Gaze also helps unconsciously regulate turn-taking in our conversations – people more often than not <a href="http://wwwhome.ctit.utwente.nl/%7Eanijholt/artikelen/chi2001_V.pdf">look away while talking</a> (as compared to when listening), and we typically exchange a mutual gaze with our partner to indicate a changeover between talking and listening. Try messing with this natural gaze flux – you will probably weird out your conversational partner.</p>
<h2>The truth about gaze detection</h2>
<p>Because the human eye gaze is optimised for easy detection, it is often easy for us to work out whether someone is looking at us. For example, if someone sitting right opposite you on the train is looking at you, you can register the direction of their gaze without looking directly at them. However, it turns out we can only reliably detect such gaze <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18986070">within four degrees of our central fixation point</a>.</p>
<p>However, we can use other cues to tell when someone is looking at us in our peripheral vision. Typically we also rely on the position or movement of their head (such as a turn towards you). We also rely on head or body cues when the potential watcher is in the dark or is wearing sunglasses. But, interestingly, you may not be right about being watched as often as you think. It turns out that in uncertain situations, <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/99/14/9602.short">people systematically overestimate</a> the likelihood that the other person is looking at them. This may be an adaptation to prepare us for interactions that are about to occur, particularly if the interaction may be threatening.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/138271/original/image-20160919-11131-qn20m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/138271/original/image-20160919-11131-qn20m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/138271/original/image-20160919-11131-qn20m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/138271/original/image-20160919-11131-qn20m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/138271/original/image-20160919-11131-qn20m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=663&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/138271/original/image-20160919-11131-qn20m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=663&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/138271/original/image-20160919-11131-qn20m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=663&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Probably nobody there.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">J Walters</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But what about the feeling that someone outside your field of vision, such as behind you, is watching? Is it really possible to “sense” that? This has long been <a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/8/208/895">a source of scientific investigation</a> (the first study on this was published in 1898) – probably because this idea is very popular. Some studies have found that <a href="https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1-15667541/reactions-to-an-unseen-gaze-remote-attention-a">up to 94% of people</a> report that they have experienced the feeling of eyes upon them and turned around to find out they were indeed being watched.</p>
<p>Sadly for those who wish we were X-men, it appears much of the body of research supporting the “psychic staring effect” appears to be suffering from <a href="http://www.csicop.org/si/show/psychic_staring_effect_an_artifact_of_pseudo_randomization">methodological issues</a>, or <a href="http://www.richardwiseman.com/resources/staring1.pdf">unexplained experimenter effects</a>. For example, when certain experimenters act as the <em>watcher</em> in these experiments, they seem to be more “successful” at getting people to detect their stares than other experimenters. It is almost certainly an unconscious bias, perhaps due to initial interactions with the experimenter.</p>
<p>Memory biases may also also come into play. If you feel like you are being watched, and turn around to check – another person in your field of view might notice you looking around and shift their gaze to you. When your eyes meet, you assume this individual has been looking all along. Situations where this happens are more memorable than when you look around to find no one looking at you.</p>
<p>So remember – the next time you think someone you can’t see is watching you, it could be your mind playing tricks on you, no matter how real it feels.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/65661/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Harriet Dempsey-Jones does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Is someone looking at you or are you just imagining things? A neuroscientist explains.Harriet Dempsey-Jones, Postdoctoral Researcher in Clinical Neurosciences, University of OxfordLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/608692016-06-22T15:33:00Z2016-06-22T15:33:00ZIs psychology really in crisis?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/127300/original/image-20160620-8861-ifipj6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">I just can't seem to get my replication studies published.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?lang=en&language=en&ref_site=photo&search_source=search_form&version=llv1&anyorall=all&safesearch=1&use_local_boost=1&autocomplete_id=&searchterm=psychoanalysis&show_color_wheel=1&orient=&commercial_ok=&media_type=images&search_cat=&searchtermx=&photographer_name=&people_gender=&people_age=&people_ethnicity=&people_number=&color=&page=1&inline=314294129">Photographee.eu/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Modern psychology is apparently in <a href="http://bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40359-016-0135-2">crisis</a>. This claim is nothing new. From phrenology to psychoanalysis, psychology has traditionally had an uneasy scientific status. Indeed, the philosopher of science, Karl Popper, viewed Freud’s theories as a typical example of pseudoscience because no test could ever show them to be <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability">false</a>. More recently, psychology has feasted on a banquet of extraordinary findings whose scientific credibility has also been questioned. </p>
<p>Some of these extraordinary findings include <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/100/3/407/">Daryl Bem’s experiments</a>, published in 2011, that seem to show future events influence the past. Bem, an emeritus professor at Cornell University, revealed that people are more likely to remember a list of words if they practise them <em>after</em> a recall test, compared with practising them before the test. In another study, he showed that people are significantly better than chance at selecting which of two curtains hide a pornographic image. </p>
<p>Then there’s Yale’s John Bargh who in 1996 <a href="http://www.yale.edu/acmelab/articles/bargh_chen_burrows_1996.pdf">reported</a> that, when unconsciously primed with an “elderly stereotype” (by unscrambling jumbled sentences containing words such as “Florida” and “bingo”), people subsequently walk more slowly. Add to this Roy Baumeister who in 1998 presented <a href="https://bama.ua.edu/%7Esprentic/672%20Muraven%20%26%20Baumeister%202000.pdf">evidence</a> suggesting we have a finite store of will-power which is sapped whenever we resist temptations such as eating chocolates. Or, in the same year, <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1998-01060-003">Ap Dijksterhuis and Ad Van Knippenberg</a> showing that performance on Trivial Pursuit is better after people list typical characteristics of a professor rather than those of a football hooligan. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/127306/original/image-20160620-8867-ajehxx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/127306/original/image-20160620-8867-ajehxx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127306/original/image-20160620-8867-ajehxx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127306/original/image-20160620-8867-ajehxx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127306/original/image-20160620-8867-ajehxx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127306/original/image-20160620-8867-ajehxx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/127306/original/image-20160620-8867-ajehxx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Does thinking about him really make you better at Trivial Pursuit?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?lang=en&language=en&ref_site=photo&search_source=search_form&version=llv1&anyorall=all&safesearch=1&use_local_boost=1&autocomplete_id=&search_tracking_id=tN3OCDYxnajjaAjIbfrMCA&searchterm=professor&show_color_wheel=1&orient=&commercial_ok=&media_type=images&search_cat=&searchtermx=&photographer_name=&people_gender=&people_age=&people_ethnicity=&people_number=&color=&page=1&inline=330576656">Dragon Images/Shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>These studies are among the <a href="http://digest.bps.org.uk/2014/09/the-10-most-controversial-psychology.html">most controversial</a> in psychology. Not least because other researchers have had difficulty replicating the experiments. These types of studies raise concerns about the methods psychologists use, but also more broadly about psychology itself. </p>
<h2>Do not repeat</h2>
<p>A survey of 1,500 scientists published in <a href="http://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scientists-lift-the-lid-on-reproducibility-1.19970?WT.mc_id=SFB_NNEWS_1508_RHBox">Nature</a> last month indicated that 24% of them said they had published a successful replication and 13% published an unsuccessful replication. Contrast this with over a century of psychology publications, where just <a href="http://pps.sagepub.com/content/7/6/537">1%</a> of papers attempted to replicate past findings. </p>
<p><a href="https://bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/2050-7283-1-2">Editors and reviewers</a> have been complicit in a systemic bias that has resulted in high-profile psychology journals becoming storehouses for the strange. Many psychologists are obsessed with the “impact factors” of journals (as are the journals) – and one way to increase impact is to publish curios. Certain high-impact journals have a reputation of publishing curios that never get replicated but which attract lots of attention for the author and journal. By contrast, confirming the findings of others through replication is unattractive, rare and relegated to less prestigious journals. </p>
<p>Despite psychology’s historical abandonment of replication, is the tide turning? This year, a crowd-sourced initiative – the <a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/349/6251/aac4716">OSC Reproducibility project</a> – attempted to replicate 100 published findings in psychology. The multinational collaborators replicated just over a third (36%) of the studies. Does this mean that psychological findings are unreliable? </p>
<p>Replication projects are selective, targeting studies that are cheaper and less technically complicated to replicate or those that are simply unbelievable. Other projects such as “<a href="http://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/full/10.1027/1864-9335/a000178">Many Labs</a>” have reported a replication rate of 77%. All initiatives are non-random and headline replication rates reflect the studies that are sampled. Even if a random sample of studies were examined, we don’t know what would constitute an acceptable replication rate in psychology. This is not an issue specific to psychology. As John Ioannidis noted: “<a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124">most published research findings are false”</a>“. After all, scientific hypotheses are our current best guesses about phenomena, not a simple accumulation of truths. </p>
<h2>Questionable research practices</h2>
<p>The frustration of many psychologists is palpable because it seems so easy to publish evidence consistent with almost any hypothesis. A likely cause of both unusual findings and non-replicability is psychologists indulging in questionable research practices (QRPs). </p>
<p>In 2012, a <a href="https://www.cmu.edu/dietrich/sds/docs/loewenstein/MeasPrevalQuestTruthTelling.pdf">survey of 2,000 American psychologists</a> found that most indulged in QRPs. Some 67% admitted selectively reporting studies that "worked”, while 74% failed to report all measures they had used. The survey also found that 71% continued to collect data until a significant result was obtained and 54% reported unexpected findings as if they were expected. And 58% excluded data after analyses. Astonishingly, more than one-third admitted they had doubts about the integrity of their own research on at least one occasion and 1.7% admitted to having faked their data. </p>
<p>The problems associated with modern psychology are longstanding and cultural, with researchers, reviewers, editors, journals and news-media all prioritising and benefiting from the quest for novelty. This systemic bias, coupled with minimal agreement on fundamental principles in certain areas of psychology, means questionable research practices can flourish – consciously or unconsciously. Large-scale replication projects will not address the cultural problems and may even exacerbate them by presenting replication as something special that we use to target the unbelievable. Replication – whether judged as failed or successful – is a fundamental aspect of normal science and needs to be both more common and more valued by psychologists and psychology journals.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/60869/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Keith Laws does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Only 1% of published psychology research papers are ever repeated. If psychologists want their discipline to be taken seriously, they’ll need to get their house in order.Keith Laws, Professor of Cognitive Neuropsychology, University of HertfordshireLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/496612015-11-23T19:17:42Z2015-11-23T19:17:42ZWhy is Einstein’s general relativity such a popular target for cranks?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/102753/original/image-20151123-408-1us2jye.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=98%2C89%2C2663%2C1796&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Take my radically intuitive theory and 'poof', general relativity will be disproved.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock/Richard Peterson</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Scientists may be celebrating the 100th anniversary of Albert Einstein’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/general-relativity-centenary">general theory of relativity</a>, but there was also a death in 1915. It was one of the many deaths of simple and intuitive physics that has happened over the past four centuries. </p>
<p>Today the concepts and mathematics of physics are often removed from everyday experience. Consequently, cutting edge physics is largely the domain of professional physicists, with years of university education.</p>
<p>But there are people who hanker for a simpler physics, toiling away on their own cosmologies. Rightly or wrongly, these people are often labelled cranks, but their endeavours tell us much about misconceptions of science, its history and what it should be. </p>
<p>I regularly browse open access website <a href="http://arxiv.org/">arxiv.org</a> to look for the latest astrophysics research. Real astrophysics, that is. But if I want to take a look at what pseudoscientists are up to, I can browse <a href="http://vixra.org/">vixra.org</a>. That’s right, “arxiv” backwards. The vixra.org website was founded by “scientists who find they are unable to submit their articles to arXiv.org” because that website’s owners filter material they “consider inappropriate”.</p>
<p>There are more than <a href="http://vixra.org/relcos/">1,800 articles</a> on vixra.org discussing relativity and cosmology, and many don’t like relativity at all. Perhaps one reason why cranks particularly <a href="http://vixra.org/abs/1511.0124">dislike relativity</a> is because it is so unlike our everyday experiences. </p>
<p>Einstein predicted that <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-test-the-twin-paradox-without-using-a-spaceship-25458">the passage of time is not absolute</a>, and can slow for speeding objects and near very massive bodies such as planets, stars and black holes. Over the past century, this bizarre predication has been measured with <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/content/177/4044/166">planes</a>, <a href="http://physicscentral.com/explore/writers/will.cfm">satellites</a>, and speeding <a href="http://demonstrations.wolfram.com/RelativisticTimeDilationInMuonDecay/">muons</a>.</p>
<p>But the varying passage of time is nothing like our everyday experience, which isn’t surprising as we don’t swing by black holes on our way to the shops. Everyday experience is often central to cranky ideas, with the most extreme example being <a href="http://www.vice.com/read/flat-earth-society-interview-876">flat earthers</a>. </p>
<p>Thus many crank theories postulate that time is absolute, because that matches everyday experience. Of course, these crank theories are overlooking experimental data, or at least most of it.</p>
<h2>History and linearity</h2>
<p>One of the most curious aspects of pseudoscience is an oddly linear approach to science. To be fair, this can result from an overly literal approach to popular histories of science, which emphasise pioneering work over replication. </p>
<p>A pivotal moment in relativity’s history is Albert Michelson and Edward Morley’s demonstration that the speed of light didn’t depend on its direction of travel nor the motion of the Earth.</p>
<p>Of course, since 1887 the <a href="https://www.aip.org/history/exhibits/einstein/ae20.htm">Michelson-Morley experiment</a> has been confirmed many times. Modern measurements have a precision orders of magnitude better than the original 1887 Michelson-Morley experiment, but these don’t feature prominently in popular histories of science. </p>
<p>Interestingly many pseudoscientists are fixated on the original Michelson-Morley experiment, and how it could be in error. This fixation assumes science is so linear that the downfall a 19th century experiment will rewrite 21st century physics. This overlooks how key theories are tested (and retested) with a myriad of experiments with greater precision and different methodologies. </p>
<p>Another consequence of the pseudoscientific approach to history is that debunked results from decades past are often used by buttress pseudoscientific ideas. For example, many pseudoscientists claim <a href="http://asa.aip.org/Echoes/vol13no1.pdf">Dayton Miller</a> detected “<a href="https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=aether+drift+dayton+miller">aether drift</a>” in the 1930s. But Miller probably underestimated his errors, as far more precise studies in subsequent decades did not confirm his findings.</p>
<p>Unfortunately this linear and selective approach to science isn’t limited to relativity. It turns up in cranky theories ranging from evolution to climate. </p>
<p>Climate scientist <a href="http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/public_html/Mann/index.php">Michael E Mann</a> is still dealing with cranky accusations about his seminal <a href="http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/public_html/shared/articles/mbh98.pdf">1998 paper</a> on the Earth’s <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v392/n6678/abs/392779a0.html">temperature history</a>, despite the fact it has been superseded by <a href="http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/figures/WGI_AR5_Fig5-7.jpg">more recent studies</a> that achieve comparable results. Indeed, it devoured so much of Mann’s time he has literally <a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Hockey-Stick-Climate-Wars/dp/0231152558">written a book</a> about his experience.</p>
<h2>What about the maths?</h2>
<p>During the birth of physics, one could gain insights with relatively simple (and beautiful) mathematics. My favourite example is Johannes Kepler’s charting of the orbit of Mars via triangulation. </p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/102304/original/image-20151118-14183-6l7qhw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/102304/original/image-20151118-14183-6l7qhw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/102304/original/image-20151118-14183-6l7qhw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=1013&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/102304/original/image-20151118-14183-6l7qhw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=1013&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/102304/original/image-20151118-14183-6l7qhw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=1013&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/102304/original/image-20151118-14183-6l7qhw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1274&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/102304/original/image-20151118-14183-6l7qhw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1274&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/102304/original/image-20151118-14183-6l7qhw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1274&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In the 17th century, Johannes Kepler used elegantly simple mathematics to chart the motion of Mars.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Johannes Kepler / University of Sydney</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Over subsequent centuries, the mathematics required for new physical insights has become more complex, as illustrated by Newton’s use of calculus and Einstein’s use of tensors. This level of mathematics is rarely in the domain of the enthusiastic but untrained amateur. So what do they do? </p>
<p>One option is to hark back to an earlier era. For example, trying to disprove general relativity by using the assumptions of special relativity or even Newtonian physics (again, despite the experiments to the contrary). Occasionally even numerology makes an appearance.</p>
<p>Another option is arguments by analogy. Analogies are useful when explaining science to a broad audience, but they aren’t the be-all and end-all of science.</p>
<p>In pseudoscience, the analogy is taken to the point of absurdity, with sprawling articles (or blog posts) weighed down with laboured analogies rather than meaningful analyses. </p>
<h2>Desiring simplicity but getting complexity</h2>
<p>Perhaps the most fascinating aspect of pseudoscientific theories is they hark for simplicity, but really just displace complexity.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/102301/original/image-20151118-14202-1w05dyl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/102301/original/image-20151118-14202-1w05dyl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/102301/original/image-20151118-14202-1w05dyl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/102301/original/image-20151118-14202-1w05dyl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/102301/original/image-20151118-14202-1w05dyl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/102301/original/image-20151118-14202-1w05dyl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/102301/original/image-20151118-14202-1w05dyl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/102301/original/image-20151118-14202-1w05dyl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A desire for naively simple science can produce bizarrely complex conclusions, like the moon landing hoax conspiracy theories.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">NASA/flickr</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Ardents of the most simplistic pseudoscientific theories often project complexity onto the motives of professional scientists. How else can one explain scientists ignoring their brilliant theories? Claims of hoaxes and scams are commonplace. Although, to be honest, even I laughed out loud the first time I saw someone describe dark matter as a “modelling scam”. </p>
<p>Again, this isn’t limited to those who don’t believe in relativity. Simple misunderstandings about photography, lighting and perspective are the launch pad for <a href="http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1860871_1860876_1860992,00.html">moon landing conspiracy theories</a>. Naively simple approaches to science can lead to complex conspiracy theories. </p>
<h2>Changing intuition</h2>
<p>Some have suggested that pseudoscience is becoming more popular and the internet certainly aids the transmission of nonsense. But when I look at history I wonder if pseudoscience will decay. </p>
<p>In the 19th century, <a href="http://www.vice.com/read/flat-earth-society-interview-876">Samuel Rowbotham</a> promoted Flat Earthism to large audiences via lectures that combined wit and fierce debating skills. Perhaps in the 19th century a spherical world orbiting a sun millions of kilometres away didn’t seem intuitive. </p>
<p>But today we can fly around the globe, navigate with GPS and Skype friends in different timezones. Today, a spherical Earth is far more intuitive than it once was, and Flat Earthism is the exemplar of absurd beliefs.</p>
<p>Could history repeat with relativity? Already GPS utilises general relativity to achieve its amazing precision. A key plot device in the movie <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0816692/">Interstellar</a> was relativistic time dilation. </p>
<p>Perhaps with time, a greater exposure to general relativity will make it more intuitive. And if this happens, a key motivation of crank theories will be diminished. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/oILbvIRsfpM?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Will general relativity become more widely understood via popular media, such as the movie Interstellar?</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p><em>Michael will be on hand for an Author Q&A between 4 and 5pm AEDT on Tuesday, November 24, 2015. Post your questions in the comments section below.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/49661/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michael J. I. Brown receives research funding from the Australian Research Council and Monash University, and has developed space-related titles for Monash University's MWorld educational app.</span></em></p>General relativity challenges our intuitive conception of how space and time work, which might explain why it’s such a popular target for crank theorists.Michael J. I. Brown, Associate professor, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.