Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Confirmation Biases

Confirmation Biases

The confirmation bias is the tendency to focus on information that confirms our existing beliefs and ignore information that is inconsistent with our expectations. For example, if you think that your professor is not very nice, you notice all of the instances of rude behavior exhibited by the professor while ignoring the countless pleasant interactions he is involved in on a daily basis. Have you ever fallen prey to the confirmation bias, either as the source or target of such bias?

Hypothesis: Accept or Fail to Reject?

Hypothesis: Accept or Fail to Reject?

The outcome of any hypothesis testing leads to rejecting or not rejecting the null hypothesis. This decision is taken based on the analysis of the data, an appropriate test statistic, an appropriate confidence level, the critical values, and P-values. However, when the evidence suggests that the null hypothesis cannot be rejected, is it right to say, 'Accept' the null hypothesis?
There are two ways to indicate that the null hypothesis is not rejected. 'Accept' the null...

The Evidence for Evolution

The Evidence for Evolution

Genetic variations accumulating within populations over generations give rise to biological evolution. Evolutionary changes can result in the formation of novel varieties and entire new species. These changes are responsible for the diverse forms of life inhabiting the planet. The evidence for evolution suggests that all living organisms descended from common ancestors.

Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II

Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II

The Bradford Hill criteria serve as guidelines for establishing causative links in epidemiological research. Beyond Strength, Consistency, Specificity, and Temporality, key criteria also include Biological Gradient, Plausibility, Coherence, Experiment, and Analogy. These principles assist scientists in assessing the likelihood of causation in complex biological contexts. Below is a summary of these concepts:

Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - I

Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - I

The Bradford Hill criteria are a group of principles that provide a framework to determine a causal relationship between a specific factor and a disease. There are nine criteria that are pivotal in assessing causality in epidemiological studies. Here's a closer look at Strength, Consistency, Specificity, and Temporality criteria with definitions and examples:

Extrasensory Perception

Extrasensory Perception

Extrasensory perception, or ESP, suggests the ability to perceive events beyond the conventional senses of sight, hearing, and touch. Parapsychologists, who research ESP and related psychic phenomena, categorize ESP into three main types: precognition, telepathy, and clairvoyance.
Precognition involves foreseeing future events, such as predicting an accident before it happens. An example of precognition could be someone dreaming about a specific event, like a car crash, which then occurs...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Anchored and Propagated Updating Within Pseudoscientific Belief Systems.

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences·2026

Same author

Effects of debunking interventions on endorsement of alternative medicine: a randomized controlled experiment in Peru.

Scientific reports·2026

Same author

Instructing participants about the random assignment of patients to treated and non-treated conditions does not diminish causal illusions.

Royal Society open science·2025

Same author

Presentation format influences the strength of causal illusions.

Memory & cognition·2025

Same author

Individual differences in associative/semantic priming: Spreading of activation in semantic memory and epistemically unwarranted beliefs.

PloS one·2025

Same author

A large-scale study and six-month follow-up of an intervention to reduce causal illusions in high school students.

Royal Society open science·2024

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Oct 9, 2025

Evidence-based Knowledge Synthesis and Hypothesis Validation: Navigating Biomedical Knowledge Bases via Explainable AI and Agentic Systems

Evidence-based Knowledge Synthesis and Hypothesis Validation: Navigating Biomedical Knowledge Bases via Explainable AI and Agentic Systems

Published on: June 13, 2025

Believers in pseudoscience present lower evidential criteria.

Javier Rodríguez-Ferreiro^1,2,3, Itxaso Barberia^4,5

¹Departament de Cognició, Desenvolupament y Psicologia de la Educació, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. rodriguezferreiro@ub.edu.

Scientific Reports

|December 22, 2021

Summary

Individuals endorsing pseudoscience require less evidence before forming conclusions, similar to those with paranormal beliefs. This suggests a common cognitive bias in unwarranted belief formation.

More Related Videos

Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses

Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses

Published on: September 28, 2018

Modulation of the Neurophysiological Response to Fearful and Stressful Stimuli Through Repetitive Religious Chanting

Modulation of the Neurophysiological Response to Fearful and Stressful Stimuli Through Repetitive Religious Chanting

Published on: November 4, 2021

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Oct 9, 2025

Evidence-based Knowledge Synthesis and Hypothesis Validation: Navigating Biomedical Knowledge Bases via Explainable AI and Agentic Systems

Evidence-based Knowledge Synthesis and Hypothesis Validation: Navigating Biomedical Knowledge Bases via Explainable AI and Agentic Systems

Published on: June 13, 2025

Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses

Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses

Published on: September 28, 2018

Modulation of the Neurophysiological Response to Fearful and Stressful Stimuli Through Repetitive Religious Chanting

Modulation of the Neurophysiological Response to Fearful and Stressful Stimuli Through Repetitive Religious Chanting

Published on: November 4, 2021

Area of Science:

Cognitive Psychology
Belief Formation
Pseudoscience Studies

Background:

Previous research links paranormal belief formation to low evidential criteria and jumping to conclusions.
The hypothesis of low evidential criteria has not been extensively studied in relation to pseudoscientific beliefs.

Purpose of the Study:

To investigate if the low evidential criteria hypothesis applies to pseudoscientific beliefs.
To compare the evidence-gathering behavior of individuals with varying levels of pseudoscientific belief endorsement.

Main Methods:

Two hypothesis testing tasks (beads task and mouse trap task) were administered.
Participants decided when to stop collecting evidence in each task.
Individuals' endorsement of pseudoscientific beliefs was assessed.

Main Results:

Individuals with stronger pseudoscientific beliefs required less evidence to reach a conclusion compared to skeptics.
This tendency was observed in both hypothesis testing tasks.

Conclusions:

Low evidential criteria appear to be a characteristic of individuals endorsing pseudoscientific beliefs.
This finding suggests a shared cognitive mechanism underlying both paranormal and pseudoscientific belief systems.