Presentation Title

When do science and intuition begin to conflict?

Faculty Mentor

Andrew Young, Andrew Shtulman

Start Date

17-11-2018 8:45 AM

End Date

17-11-2018 9:00 AM

Location

C155

Session

Oral 1

Type of Presentation

Oral Talk

Subject Area

behavioral_social_sciences

Abstract

Evidence of explanatory coexistence, the phenomenon of conflicting intuitive and scientific beliefs, has been found in numerous studies on high school students, college students, and adults. When placed under a cognitive load, like time constraints, participants in these studies struggle to quickly and accurately verify statements about science. In the present research, we sought to replicate adult versions of this study with children. Fifty-one children (M = 8.4 years; SD = 2.1 years) verified, as quickly as possible, statements about life and matter before and after a tutorial on the scientific properties of life or matter. Half the statements were consistent with intuitive theories of the domain (e.g., “bricks have weight) and half were inconsistent (e.g., “air has weight”). Children received a 7-8 minute tutorial in one of the two domains in order to teach the correct version of these theories. Our results demonstrated that children were more accurate for intuition-consistent statements than intuition-inconsistent statements at pretest and posttest. Children also responded correctly faster to the intuition-consistent statements than intuition-inconsistent statements. These findings suggest children, who are newly encountering scientific theories, exhibit explanatory coexistence in a manner similar to adults. These results suggest the conflict between science and intuition cannot be eliminated altogether.

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Nov 17th, 8:45 AM Nov 17th, 9:00 AM

When do science and intuition begin to conflict?

C155

Evidence of explanatory coexistence, the phenomenon of conflicting intuitive and scientific beliefs, has been found in numerous studies on high school students, college students, and adults. When placed under a cognitive load, like time constraints, participants in these studies struggle to quickly and accurately verify statements about science. In the present research, we sought to replicate adult versions of this study with children. Fifty-one children (M = 8.4 years; SD = 2.1 years) verified, as quickly as possible, statements about life and matter before and after a tutorial on the scientific properties of life or matter. Half the statements were consistent with intuitive theories of the domain (e.g., “bricks have weight) and half were inconsistent (e.g., “air has weight”). Children received a 7-8 minute tutorial in one of the two domains in order to teach the correct version of these theories. Our results demonstrated that children were more accurate for intuition-consistent statements than intuition-inconsistent statements at pretest and posttest. Children also responded correctly faster to the intuition-consistent statements than intuition-inconsistent statements. These findings suggest children, who are newly encountering scientific theories, exhibit explanatory coexistence in a manner similar to adults. These results suggest the conflict between science and intuition cannot be eliminated altogether.