Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 14, 2026

Brain Imaging Investigation of the Neural Correlates of Emotional Autobiographical Recollection
Published on: August 26, 2011
Why do psychology students believe in neuromyths? A study of personality, contextual and cognitive predictors
1Instituto de Ciencias Humanas, Sociales y Ambientales (INCIHUSA), CCT-Mendoza, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Av. Ruiz Leal s/n - Parque Gral, San Martín, M5500, Mendoza, Argentina; Centro de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Económicas (CIHUCE), Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina, Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias Económicas (Sede Mendoza), Argentina.
Background:
Neuromyths-misconceptions arising from misinterpretations of neuroscientific findings-are widely endorsed by educators and students, including those in psychology. Their persistence has been linked to contextual, cognitive, and personality-related factors, but evidence is mixed, especially among psychology students. This study examined predictors of neuromyth endorsement in Argentine psychology undergraduates.
Objective:
To identify contextual (neuroscience training, interest), personality (Need for Cognition; NFC), and cognitive (Cognitive Reflection Test; CRT) predictors of neuromyth beliefs.
Methods:
A convenience sample of 320 psychology students (82.5% women; M_age = 27.39 years) completed online measures assessing neuromyth endorsement, general brain knowledge, NFC, CRT, and self-reported neuroscience training and interest. Spearman correlations and hierarchical regressions were conducted to examine associations and predictive effects.
Results:
Participants endorsed 41.22% of neuromyths on average, with learning styles (76.25%) and sensory-rich environments benefits (74.37%) being the most accepted. CRT scores negatively predicted neuromyth endorsement (β = -.175, p < .001), whereas the NFC "enjoyment of thinking" factor positively predicted endorsement (β = 0.145, p = .024). Age also showed a positive effect (β = 0.175, p = .002). Neuroscience interest, courses taken, and general brain knowledge did not predict neuromyth acceptance, although they were positively associated with neuroscience knowledge.
Conclusions:
Analytical thinking emerged as the strongest protective factor against neuromyths, while enjoyment of thinking unexpectedly predicted higher endorsement, possibly reflecting exposure to low-quality sources of information and/or Dunning-Kruger effects. Factual neuroscience knowledge and training did not decrease neuromyth endorsement, underscoring the importance of fostering critical thinking skills within psychology education.
More Related Videos
06:42Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses
Published on: September 28, 2018
07:43A Naturalistic Setup for Presenting Real People and Live Actions in Experimental Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience Studies
Published on: August 4, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Social Cognitive Perspective on Personality
Implicit Personality Theories
Introduction to Personality Psychology
Early Theories of Personality
The study of personality dates...
Psychodynamic Perspectives on Personality
Psychodynamic theorists argue that unconscious...
Personality Theory by Eysenck and Eysenck
In the extroversion/introversion dimension, highly extroverted people are sociable, outgoing, and easily connect with others. In contrast,...
The Scientific Method