Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×

Online ordering will be unavailable from 17:00 GMT on Friday, April 25 until 17:00 GMT on Sunday, April 27 due to maintenance. We apologise for the inconvenience.

  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2 results

  • Deconstructing the seductive allure of neuroscience explanations

  • Deena Skolnick Weisberg, Jordan C. V. Taylor, Emily J. Hopkins
  • Journal:
    Judgment and Decision Making / Volume 10 / Issue 5 / September 2015
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    01 January 2023, pp. 429-441
    • Article
      • You have access
      • Open access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation

  • Previous work showed that people find explanations more satisfying when they contain irrelevant neuroscience information. The current studies investigate why this effect happens. In Study 1 ( N=322), subjects judged psychology explanations that did or did not contain irrelevant neuroscience information. Longer explanations were judged more satisfying, as were explanations containing neuroscience information, but these two factors made independent contributions. In Study 2 ( N=255), subjects directly compared good and bad explanations. Subjects were generally successful at selecting the good explanation except when the bad explanation contained neuroscience and the good one did not. Study 3 ( N=159) tested whether neuroscience jargon was necessary for the effect, or whether it would obtain with any reference to the brain. Responses to these two conditions did not differ. These results confirm that neuroscience information exerts a seductive effect on people’s judgments, which may explain the appeal of neuroscience information within the public sphere.

  • 5 - Are Preschoolers Creative?

  • from Part II - The Development of Creativity
  • Edited by Sandra W. Russ, Case Western Reserve University, Ohio, Jessica D. Hoffmann, Yale University, Connecticut, James C. Kaufman, University of Connecticut
  • Book:
    The Cambridge Handbook of Lifespan Development of Creativity
    Published online:
    19 November 2021
    Print publication:
    25 November 2021, pp 101-125

  • Summary

    What can research tell us about creativity in 3- to 5-year-old children? This chapter reviews the last 50 years of research to address this question. Several themes emerge. First, creativity has been notoriously difficult to define and measure, and is often studied in the context of children’s play and temperament. Second, the methods for studying creativity have been limited – largely relying on divergent-thinking measures. Third, there is interest in interventions that aim to foster creativity in young children. While the field has amassed a lot of data, strong studies are hard to find. Here, we boldly suggest that it is time to move beyond the traditional literature. Looking at more narrowly construed fields like curiosity, exploration, and innovation can offer a toehold into a better understanding of this broad field and holds the promise of helping researchers develop a more coherent model of how creativity plays out in the lives of young children.