Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Perceptions of Eighth Graders Concerning the Aim, Effectiveness, and Scientific Basis of Pseudoscience: the Case of Crystal Healing

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Practices such as astrology or crystal healing can be defined as pseudoscience. Against pseudoscience, one of the major responsibilities of science education must be to develop science-literate individuals who are able to understand what science is, how science is undertaken, how scientific knowledge is constructed, and how it is justified, then they will be able to determine whether a claim is valid and be alert to practices which fall outside the realms of science, especially those in the area of pseudoscience. For this reason, the ability of recognizing flawed process and claims of pseudoscience is referred to one of the crucial parts of science literacy. The present study aimed to uncover middle school students’ understanding of the inherent aim of pseudoscientists and pseudoscientific applications related to crystals and to reveal their judgments and justifications regarding the effectiveness and scientific basis of these applications. The present study was qualitative in nature. The results of the study showed that the students were very gullible about the aim, effectiveness, and scientific basis of pseudoscientific practices and in particular the use of crystals. Furthermore, similar to pseudoscientists, the students generally used weak reasoning to evaluate the presented claims and research designs about crystals and crystal healing.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: a critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665–701.

    Google Scholar 

  • Afonso, A. S., & Gilbert, J. K. (2010). Pseudo-science: a meaningful context for assessing nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 32(3), 329–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V., & Donnelly, L. A. (2010). Teaching nature of science to K-2 students: what understandings can they attain? International Journal of Science Education, 32(1), 97–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V., Nargund-Joshi, V., Weiland, I., Pongsanon, K., & Avsar, B. (2014). What third grade students of differing ability levels learn about nature of science after a year of instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 36(2), 244–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1989). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aslan, O., & Tasar, M. F. (2013). How do science teachers view and teach the nature of science? A classroom investigation. Education and Science, 38(167), 65–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baran, G. R., Kiani, M. F., & Samuel, S. P. (2014). Healthcare and biomedical technology in the 21st century: an introduction for non-science majors. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, A., Abd-EI-Fattah, S., Chandler, M., & Yates, G. C. R. (2008). New age beliefs among teacher education students. Critical & Creative Thinking, 16(2), 23–37.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • BouJaoude, S., & Abd-El Khalick, F. (1995). Lebanese middle school students’ definitions of science and perceptions of its purpose and usage. Paper presented at National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA.

  • Bunge, M. (2011). Knowledge: genuine and bogus. Science & Education, 20(5–6), 411–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carey, S., Evans, R., Honda, M., Jay, E., & Unger, C. (1989). An experiment is when you try it and see if it works: a study of grade 7 students’ understanding of the construction of scientific knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 11(5), 514–529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, R. T. (2005). Becoming a critical thinker. a guide for the new millennium (2nd ed.). Boston: Pearson Custom Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, R. T. (2014). Pseudoscience. Retrieved from http://skepdic.com/pseudosc.html.

  • Coker, R. (2001). Distinguishing science and pseudoscience. Retrieved from http://www.quackwatch.comm/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/pseudo.html.

  • Creswell, J. W. (2006). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • DeRobertis, M. M., & Delaney, P. A. (1993). A survey of the attitudes of university students to astrology and astronomy. Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada, 87, 34–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeRobertis, M. M., & Delaney, P. A. (2000). A second survey of the attitudes of university students to astrology and astronomy. Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada, 94, 112–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ede, A. (2000). Has science education become an enemy of scientific rationality? Skeptical Inquirer, 24, 48–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elder, A. D. (2002). Characterizing fifth grade students’ epistemological beliefs in science. In P. R. Pintrich (Ed.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 347–364). Lawrence Erlbaum associates: Mahwah.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2011). Science education in Europe: national Policies, practices and research. Brussels: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2015). Science education for responsible citizenship. Luxembourg: Research and Innovation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eve, R. A., & Dunn, D. (1990). Psychic Powers, Astrology & Creationism in the Classroom? Evidence of Pseudoscientific Beliefs among High School Biology & Life Science Teachers. The American Biology Teacher, 52(1), 10–21.

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Good, R. (2009). Why the study of pseudoscience should be included in the school science curriculum. Paper presented at International History and Philosophy of Science Teaching Group at Notre Dame University, South Bend, Indiana.

  • Good, R. (2012). Why the study of pseudoscience should be included in nature of science studies. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Advances in nature of science research (pp. 97–106). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Good, R., & Slezak, P. (2011). Editors’ introduction. Science & Education, 20(5–6), 401–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, G. (1996). Evaluating claims about treatments for autism. In C. Maurice, G. Green, & S. Luce (Eds.), Behavioral intervention for young children with autism: a manual for parents and professional (pp. 15–28). Austin-Texas: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, S. O. (2015). Science and pseudo-science. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2015 Edition). Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2015/entries/pseudo-science/.

  • Happs, J. C. (1991). Challenging pseudoscientific and paranormal beliefs held by some pre-service primary teachers. Research in Science Education, 21, 171–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (2011). Looking to the future: building a curriculum for social activism. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurd, P. D. (1998). Scientific literacy: new minds for a changing world. Science Education, 82(3), 407–416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes. Oxford, England: Houghton Mifflin.

  • Johnson, R. M. (2003). Is knowledge of science associated with higher skepticism of pseudoscientific claim? (University of Tennessee Honors Thesis Projects). Knoxville: University of Tennessee.

  • Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2012). Educational research: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Los Angeles: SAGE Publication.

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang, S., Scharmann, L. C., & Noh, T. (2005). Examining students’ views on the nature of science: results from Korean 6th, 8th, and 10th graders. Science Education, 89(2), 314–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khishfe, R. (2008). The development of seventh graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(4), 470–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khishfe, R., & Lederman, N. G. (2006). Teaching nature of science within a controversial topic: integrated versus nonintegrated. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 377–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladyman, J. (2013). Toward a demarcation of science from pseudoscience. In M. Pigliucci & M. Boudry (Eds.), Philosophy of pseudoscience (pp. 45–59). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, T. J. (1999). Assessing psychological critical thinking as a learning outcome for psychology majors. Teaching of Psychology, 26, 207–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, T. J. (2007). Scientific perspectives on pseudoscience and the paranormal: Readings for general psychology. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: a review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831–879). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, J. S., Lederman, N. G., Bartos, S. A., Bartels, S. L., Meyer, A. A., & Schwartz, R. S. (2014). Meaningful assessment of learners’ understandings about scientific inquiry: the views about scientific inquiry (VASI) questionnaire. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51, 65–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lilienfeld, S. O., & Landfield, K. (2008). Science and pseudoscience in law enforcement: a user-friendly primer. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 1215–1230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lilienfeld, S. O., Lohr, M., & Morier, D. (2001). The teaching of courses in the science and pseudoscience of psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 28, 182–191.

    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, 7–36.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundström, M. (2007). Students’ beliefs in pseudoscience. Paper Presented at ESERA Conference, Malmö.

  • Lundström, M., & Jakobsson, A. (2009). Students’ ideas regarding science and pseudo-science in relation to the human body and health. NORDINA, 5(1), 3–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahner, M. (2013). Science and pseudoscience: how to demarcate after the (alleged) demise of the demarcation problem. In M. Pigliucci & M. Boudry (Eds.), Philosophy of pseudoscience (pp. 29–43). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case studies application in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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. https://doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.93129

    Google Scholar 

  • Metin, D. & Leblebicioglu, G. (2011). How did a science camp affect children’s conceptions of science? Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 12(1), 2.

  • Miles, M. B., Huberman, M. A., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: a methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of National Education (MoNE). (2013). Elementary science and technology course curriculum. Ankara: Ministry of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, R. (1992). Debunking the paranonnal: we should teach critical thinking as a necessity for living, not just as a tool for science. The American Biology Teacher, 54(1), 4–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moss, M. D., Abrams, E. D., & Robb, J. (2001). Examining student conceptions of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 23(8), 771–790.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC). (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: a guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/9596.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • National Science Board (NSB). (2002). Science and engineering indicators 2002. NSB-02-01A. Arlington: National Science Foundation.

  • National Science Board (NSB). (2008). Science and Engineering Indicators 2008. Two volumes. Arlington: National Science Foundation (volume 1, NSB 08–01; volume 2, NSB 08-01A). Available at http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind08/.

  • National Science Board (NSB). (2012). Science and engineering indicators 2012. Arlington: National Science Foundation (NSB 12–01) Available at http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/.

    Google Scholar 

  • NGSS. (2013). Next generation science standards: topic arrangements of the next generation science standards. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nickell, D. S. (1992). The pseudoscientific beliefs of high school students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Indiana: Indiana University School of Education.

  • Nisbet, M. (2006). Cultural Indicators of the paranormal: Science and the media. Skeptical Inquirer. Retrieved from http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/cultural_indicators_of_the_paranormal. Accessed 15 April 2014.

  • NSES. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, K. (1900). The Grammar of Science (2nd ed.). London: Adam and Charles Black.

  • Popper, K. (1963). Conjectures and refutations. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preece, P. F., & Baxter, J. H. (2000). Skepticism and gullibility: the superstitious and pseudoscientific beliefs of secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 1147–1156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, T. (2003). Believe it or not: religious and other paranormal beliefs in the United States. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 42(1), 95–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, T. S., & Rossiter, J. R. (1974). Children and commercial persuasion: an attribution theory analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 1, 13–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W. M., & Calabrese Barton, A. (2004). Rethinking scientific literacy. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W. M., & Lee, S. (2002). Scientific literacy as collective praxis. Public Understanding of Science, 11, 33–56. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/11/1/302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W. M., & Lee, S. (2004). Science education as/for participation in the community. Science Education, 88, 263–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, W. & Beyerstein, B.L. (1996). Traditional medicine and pseudoscience in China: A report of the second CSICOP delegation. Skeptical Inquirer, 20(5). Retrieved from https://www.csicop.org/si/show/china_conference_2. Accessed 20 April 2016.

  • Shermer, M. (1997). Why people believe weird things: pseudoscience, superstition, and other confusions of our time. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shermer, M. (2003). Why smart people believe weird things. Skeptic, 10(2), 62–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. C. (2010). Pseudoscience and extraordinary claims of the paranormal: a critical thinker’s toolkit. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C. E., & Dibner, K. A. (2016). Science literacy: concepts, contexts, and consequences. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sugarman, H., Impey, C., Buxner, S., & Antonellis, J. (2011). Astrology beliefs among undergraduate students. Astronomy Education Review, 10, 010101–010101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland, D., & Dennick, R. (2002). Exploring culture, language and the perception of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(1), 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabata, M., Sezik, E., Honda, G., Yeşilada, E., Fukui, H., Goto, K., & Ikeshiro, Y. (1994). Traditional medicine in Turkey III. Folk medicine in East Anatolia, Van and Bitlis Provinces. International Journal of Pharmacognosy, 32(1), 3–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, C.-Y., Shein, P. P., Jack, B. M., Wu, K.-C., Chou, C.-Y., Wu, Y.-Y., Liu, C.-J., Chiu, H.-L., Hung, J.-F., Chao, D., & Huang, T.-C. (2012). Effects of exposure to pseudoscientific television programs upon Taiwanese citizens’ pseudoscientific beliefs. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 2(2), 175–194.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisberg, D. S., Keil, F. C., Goodstein, J., Rawson, E., & Gray, J. R. (2008). The seductive allure of neuroscience explanations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(3), 470–477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whittle, C.H. (2004). Development of beliefs in paranormal and supernatural phenomena. Skeptical Inquirer, 28(2). Retrieved from https://www.csicop.org/si/show/development_of_beliefs_in_paranormal_and_supernatural_phenomena. Accessed 20 June 2014.

  • Wiseman, R., & Watt, C. (2004). Measuring superstitious belief: why lucky charms matter. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1533–1541.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Bozok University, Yozgat, Turkey

    Duygu Metin

  2. School of Education, Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey

    Jale Cakiroglu

  3. School of Education, Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Abant Izzet Baysal University, Bolu, Turkey

    Gulsen Leblebicioglu

Authors
  1. Duygu Metin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jale Cakiroglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gulsen Leblebicioglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Duygu Metin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Metin, D., Cakiroglu, J. & Leblebicioglu, G. Perceptions of Eighth Graders Concerning the Aim, Effectiveness, and Scientific Basis of Pseudoscience: the Case of Crystal Healing. Res Sci Educ 50, 175–202 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9685-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9685-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation