Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Pre-service Teachers’ False Beliefs in Superstitions and Pseudosciences in Relation to Science and Technology

  • Article
  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In order to increase scientific competence within the general population, it is important that teachers and educators have a realistic image of science and scientists, leaving aside superstitions and pseudoscientific claims that could be transmitted to their students. A starting point in this strategy is to make a good diagnosis of the future teachers’ perceptions of science and technology. To this end, in this paper, we present a survey conducted with 383 Spanish university students, training to become schoolteachers. We focused on their interest in science and technology and their degree of trust in false beliefs and pseudoscience. The results are analysed and compared with those of a group of similar age and educational background that have answered a general population survey. It was found that, although the interest in science and technology and the trust in scientists is higher in pre-service teachers than in the general population, their level of belief in pseudoscientific issues is comparable, or even higher in some cases to those of the general population. The results show that these false beliefs are independent of the interest that future teachers show in science and technology. The presence of such beliefs among pre-service teachers should be a source of reflection, since these may be part of the hidden curriculum that they will transmit to their students.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Achterberg, P., De Koster, W., & Van der Waal, J. (2017). A science confidence gap: Education, trust in scientific methods, and trust in scientific institutions in the United States, 2014. Public Understanding of Science, 26(6), 704–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baram-Tsabari, A., & Segev, E. (2011). Exploring new web-based tools to identify public interest in science. Public Understanding of Science, 20(1), 130–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barcelos, A. M. F. (2003). Teachers’ and students’ beliefs within a Deweyan framework: Conflict and influence. In Beliefs about SLA (pp. 171–199). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, P. L., & Luchman, T. (1966). Social construction of reality. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beyerstein, B. L. (1995). Distinguishing science from pseudoscience. Victoria: The Centre for Curriculum and Professional Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhakthavatsalam, S. (2019). The value of false theories in science education. Science & Education, 28(1–2), 5–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blancke, S., Boudry, M., & Pigliucci, M. (2017). Why do irrational beliefs mimic science? The cultural evolution of pseudoscience. Theoria, 83(1), 78–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanco-López, Á. B. (2018). Percepción pública de la ciencia en España. Implicaciones para la didáctica de las ciencias. In Martínez Losada, C., & García Barros, S. (Eds.), Encuentros de Didáctica de las Ciencias Experimentales: Iluminando el cambio educativo (pp. 1349–1354). Servizo de Publicacións da Universidade da Coruña.

  • Blanco-López, Á., España-Ramos, E., González-García, F. J., & Franco-Mariscal, A. J. (2015). Key aspects of scientific competence for citizenship: A Delphi study of the expert community in Spain. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(2), 164–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozdoğan, A. E., & Yalçın, N. (2009). Determining the influence of a science exhibition center training program on elementary pupils’ interest and achievement in science. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 5(1), 27–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, P. R. (2013). The trappings of science: Media messages, scientific authority, and beliefs about paranormal investigators. Science Communication, 35(3), 311–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cano-Orón, L. (2019). A Twitter campaign against pseudoscience: The sceptical discourse on complementary therapies in Spain. Public Understanding of Science, 28(6), 679–695.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Consejo General de Colegios Oficiales de Médicos. (2004). Ética de la práctica de la Acupuntura. https://cgcom.es/sites/default/files//04_10_02_decl_comdeo_acupuntura.pdf. Accessed 9 Nov 2019.

  • Cortiñas-Rovira, S., Alonso-Marcos, F., Pont-Sorribes, C., & Escribà-Sales, E. (2015). Science journalists’ perceptions and attitudes to pseudoscience in Spain. Public Understanding of Science, 24(4), 450–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darke, P. R., & Freedman, J. L. (1997). The belief in good luck scale. Journal of Research in Personality, 31(4), 486–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day, L., & Maltby, J. (2005). “With good luck”: Belief in good luck and cognitive planning. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(7), 1217–1226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delgado-López, P. D., & Corrales-García, E. M. (2018). Influence of Internet and social media in the promotion of alternative oncology, cancer quackery, and the predatory publishing phenomenon. Cureus, 10(5).

  • Dietrich, D. R., Dekant, W., Greim, H., Heslop-Harrison, P., Berry, C., Boobis, A., Hengstler, J., & Sharpe, R. (2016). Allowing pseudoscience into EU risk assessment processes is eroding public trust in science experts and in science as a whole: The bigger picture. Chemico-Biological Interactions, 257, 1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dijk, E. M. V. (2011). Portraying real science in science communication. Science Education, 95(6), 1086–1100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doygun, Y., Ozcan, H., FatihTasar, M. (2019). An investigation of pre-service science teachers’ understanding of the concepts ‘science’ and ‘pseudoscience’. In Seroglou, F., & Koulountzos, V. (Eds.), Re-introducing science Sculpting the image of science, 445–451.

  • Driver, R. (1986). Psicología cognoscitiva y esquemas conceptuales de los alumnos. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 4(1), 3–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Druckman, J. N. (2017). The crisis of politicization within and beyond science. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(9), 615–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Es, H., & Turgut, H. (2018). Candidate classroom teachers’ perceptions about being scientific in the context of pseudoscience. Journal of Education in Science, Environment and Health (JESEH), 4(2), 142–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • España. (2018a). Orden SSI/425/2018, de 27 de abril, por la que se regula la comunicación que deben realizar los titulares de medicamentos homeopáticos a los que se refiere la disposición transitoria sexta del Real Decreto 1345/2007, de 11 de octubre, por el que se regula el procedimiento de autorización, Registro y condiciones de dispensación de los medicamentos de uso humano fabricados industrialmente. Boletín Oficial del Estado, 103, 46601–46604.

    Google Scholar 

  • España. (2018b). Resolución de 29 de octubre de 2018, de la Agencia Española de Medicamentos y Productos Sanitarios, por la que se establece la relación de medicamentos homeopáticos para los que se ha comunicado la intención de adecuación al Real Decreto 1345/2007, de 11 de octubre, se fija el calendario para presentar la solicitud de autorización de comercialización, y se ordena la retirada del mercado de determinados medicamentos homeopáticos. Boletín Oficial del Estado, 262, 105994–106035.

    Google Scholar 

  • FECYT (Fundación Española para la Ciencia y la Tecnología). (2016). Percepción social de la ciencia y la tecnología. Madrid, FECYT.

  • Finn, P., Bothe, A. K., & Bramlett, R. E. (2005). Science and pseudoscience in communication disorders. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 14(3), 172–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, D. (1984). The image of science, technological consciousness, and the hidden curriculum. Curriculum Inquiry, 14(4), 367–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grofton, W., & Regehr, G. (2006). What we don't know we are teaching: Unveiling the hidden curriculum. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 449, 20–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guenther, L., & Weingart, P. (2018). Promises and reservations towards science and technology among South African publics: A culture-sensitive approach. Public Understanding of Science, 27(1), 47–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, S. O. (1996). Defining pseudoscience. Philosophia Naturalis, 33, 169–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, S. O. (2009). Cutting the Gordian knot of demarcation. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 23(3), 237–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, L. (2018). Science education, indoctrination, and the hidden curriculum. In In history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 283–306). Cham: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hewson, M. G., & Hewson, P. W. (1983). Effect of instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(8), 731–743.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, A., & Millar, R. (2000). AS science for public understanding. Heinemann.

  • Hurtado, M. C., & Cerezo, J. A. L. (2012). Political dimensions of scientific culture: Highlights from the Ibero-American survey on the social perception of science and scientific culture. Public Understanding of Science, 21(3), 369–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, P. W. (1968). Life in classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kallery, M. (2001). Early-years educators’ attitudes to science and pseudo-science: The case of astronomy and astrology. European Journal of Teacher Education, 24(3), 329–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, A. O. (2014). Research on the pseudoscientific beliefs of preservice science teachers: A sample from astronomy astrology. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(3), 381–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, A. B., & Kaufman, J. C. (2018). Pseudoscience: The conspiracy against science. MIT Press.

  • Keranto, T. (2001). The perceived credibility of scientific claims, paranormal phenomena, and miracles among primary teacher students: A comparative study. Science & Education, 10(5), 493–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lack, C. W., & Rousseau, J. (2016). Critical thinking, science, and pseudoscience: Why we can't trust our brains. Springer Publishing Company.

  • Lawson, D. F., Stevenson, K. T., Peterson, M. N., Carrier, S. J., Strnad, R. L., & Seekamp, E. (2019). Children can foster climate change concern among their parents. Nature Climate Change, 9(6), 458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education (pp. 831–879). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lilienfeld, S. O., Ammirati, R., & David, M. (2012). Distinguishing science from pseudoscience in school psychology: Science and scientific thinking as safeguards against human error. Journal of School Psychology, 50(1), 7–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindeman, M. (1998). Motivation, cognition and pseudoscience. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 39(4), 257–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • López, J. A., & Cámara, M. (2004). Apropiación social de la ciencia. Fundación Española para la Ciencia y la Tecnología (FECYT). Percepción social de la ciencia y la tecnología en España, 2004, 31–57.

  • Losh, S. C., & Nzekwe, B. (2011a). The foundations: How education major influences basic science knowledge and pseudoscience beliefs. In 2011 Atlanta Conference on Science and Innovation Policy (pp. 1–16). IEEE.

  • Losh, S. C., & Nzekwe, B. (2011b). Creatures in the classroom: Preservice teacher beliefs about fantastic beasts, magic, extraterrestrials, evolution and creationism. Science & Education, 20(5–6), 473–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luján, J. L., & Todt, O. (2007). Precaution in public: The social perception of the role of science and values in policy making. Public Understanding of Science, 16(1), 97–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacRitchie, F. (2018). The need for critical thinking and the scientific method. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Madsen, M. V., Gøtzsche, P. C., & Hróbjartsson, A. (2009). Acupuncture treatment for pain: Systematic review of randomised clinical trials with acupuncture, placebo acupuncture, and no acupuncture groups. BMJ, 338, a3115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahner, M. (2007). Demarcating science from nonscience. In T. A. Kuipers (Ed.), General philosophy of science: Focal issues (pp. 515–576). Nort Holland: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, E., Soldatenko, M., Acker, S., & Gair, M. (2002). Peekaboo: Hiding and outing the curriculum. In Margolis, E. (Ed.) The hidden curriculum in higher education (pp. 11–30). Routledge.

  • Martin, M. (1994). Pseudoscience, the paranormal, and science education. Science & Education, 3(4), 357–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McIntyre, L. (2019). The scientific attitude: Defending science from denial, fraud, and pseudoscience. MIT Press.

  • Metin, D., & Ertepinar, H. (2016). Inferring pre-service science teachers’ understanding of science by using socially embedded pseudoscientific context. International Journal of Education in Mathematics Science and Technology, 4(4), 340–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molina, R. G. (2015). Pseudociencia en el mundo contemporáneo. Alambique: Didáctica de las ciencias experimentales, 81, 25–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreno-Castro, C., Corell-Doménech, M., & Camaño-Puig, R. (2019). Which has more influence on perception of pseudo-therapies: The media’s information, friends or acquaintances opinion, or educational background? Communications Society, 32(3), 35–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mugaloglu, E. Z. (2014). The problem of pseudoscience in science education and implications of constructivist pedagogy. Science & Education, 23(4), 829–842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muñoz-Ortego, J., Solans-Domènech, M., Carrion, C., & ABE Working Group. (2016). Indicaciones médicas de la acupuntura: revisión sistemática. Medicina Clínica, 147, 250–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nisbet, M. C., Scheufele, D. A., Shanahan, J., Moy, P., Brossard, D., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2002). Knowledge, reservations, or promise? A media effects model for public perceptions of science and technology. Communication Research, 29(5), 584–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palomar, R., Domínguez-Sales, M. C., & Solbes, J. (2016). Las visiones del alumnado y los profesores en formación sobre las pseudociencias. In III Simposio Internacional de Enseñanza de las Ciencias SIEC. http://aplicacion.siec2016.org/pdf.png. Accessed 9 Nov 2019.

  • Parker, M., Acland, A., Armstrong, H. J., Bellingham, J. R., Bland, J., Bodmer, H. C., et al. (2014). Identifying the science and technology dimensions of emerging public policy issues through horizon scanning. PLoS One, 9(5), e96480.

  • Perez, D. G., & Alis, J. C. (1985). Science learning as a conceptual and methodological change. The European Journal of Science Education, 7(3), 231–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pigliucci, M., & Boudry, M. (2013). Philosophy of pseudoscience: Reconsidering the demarcation problem. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. P. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Revuelta, G., & Corchero, C. (2016). Perfiles generacionales en el consumo de información científica. Percepción social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología, 2016, 179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, T. J., Brown, J., Johnson, A., Sanberg, C., & Schilmier, M. (2004). Science literacy and belief in paranormal: An empirical test. Skeptic, 10(4), 12–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sagan, C. (2011). The demon-haunted world: Science as a candle in the dark. New York: Ballantine Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saltelli, A., & Funtowicz, S. (2017). What is science’s crisis really about? Futures, 91, 5–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shermer, M. (2002a). The skeptic encyclopedia of pseudoscience. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shermer, M. (2002b). Why people believe weird things: Pseudoscience, superstition, and other confusions of our time. Macmillan.

  • Smith, C. L., Johnson, J. L., & Hathaway, W. (2009). Personality contributions to belief in paranormal phenomena. Individual Differences Research, 7(2), 85–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solbes, J., Palomar, R., & Domínguez, M. C. (2017). ¿En qué grado afectan las pseudociencias al profesorado?: una mirada al pensamiento de los docentes de ciencias en formación. Mètode: Revista de difusión de la Investigación, 96, 28–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Surmeli, H., & Saka, M. (2011). Paranormal beliefs of preservice teachers. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 1385–1390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trumper, R. (2006). Factors affecting junior high school students’ interest in biology. Science Education International, 17(1), 31–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsipursky, G. (2018). (Dis) trust in science. Psychology Today.

  • Turgut, H. (2011). The context of demarcation in nature of science teaching: The case of astrology. Science & Education, 20(5–6), 491–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler-Wood, T., Ellison, A., Lim, O., & Periathiruvadi, S. (2012). Bringing up girls in science (BUGS): The effectiveness of an afterschool environmental science program for increasing female students’ interest in science careers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(1), 46–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uçar, M. B., & Sahin, E. (2018). Pre-service science teachers’ discrimination level of science and pseudoscience. Science Education International, 29(4), 267–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vollebergh, W. A., Ledema, J., & Raaijmakers, Q. A. (2001). Intergenerational transmission and the formation of cultural orientations in adolescence and young adulthood. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(4), 1185–1198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voulvoulis, N., & Burgman, M. A. (2019). The contrasting roles of science and technology in environmental challenges. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 49(12), 1079–1106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, W. R., Hoekstra, S. J., & Vogl, R. J. (2002). Science education is no guarantee of skepticism. Skeptic (Altadena, CA), 9(3), 24–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, W. F. (2013). Encyclopedia of pseudoscience: From alien abductions to zone therapy. Routledge.

  • Willingham, D. (2011). Trust me, I’m a scientist. Scientific American, 304, 5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J. A. (2018). Reducing pseudoscientific and paranormal beliefs in university students through a course in science and critical thinking. Science & Education, 27(1–2), 183–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiseman, R. (2004). The luck factor: The scientific study of the lucky mind. London: Arrow.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study has been carried out thanks to the project: “Educating on Science: Improving the perception on Science and Technology of future teachers”, funded by Samuel Solórzano Barruso Foundation of the University of Salamanca, and the project “Awareness of future teachers about superstitions, pseudosciences and their consequences”, funded by the University of Salamanca. The authors would want to thank the three anonymous reviewers, whose comments and suggestions helped to improve and clarify the original version of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departamento de Didáctica de la Matemática y Didáctica de las Ciencias Experimentales, Universidad de Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain

    Miguel Ángel Fuertes-Prieto, Santiago Andrés-Sánchez, Diego Corrochano-Fernández, Carmen Urones-Jambrina, Mª Laura Delgado-Martín, Pablo Herrero-Teijón & Camilo Ruiz

Authors
  1. Miguel Ángel Fuertes-Prieto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Santiago Andrés-Sánchez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Diego Corrochano-Fernández
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Carmen Urones-Jambrina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mª Laura Delgado-Martín
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Pablo Herrero-Teijón
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Camilo Ruiz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Miguel Ángel Fuertes-Prieto.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic Supplementary Material

ESM 1

(PDF 455 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fuertes-Prieto, M.Á., Andrés-Sánchez, S., Corrochano-Fernández, D. et al. Pre-service Teachers’ False Beliefs in Superstitions and Pseudosciences in Relation to Science and Technology. Sci & Educ 29, 1235–1254 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00140-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00140-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation