207
Why We Believe: Fostering Scientific Thought
a priori method, and the scientific method. That is, what do they know that arises from
each of the modes of fixing beliefs? And why does the belief fall into that category?
The students should recognize that tenacity is associated with simply wanting to
believe or refusing to consider alternatives. Authority, which in this case can involve
either social coercion or simply reliance on an expert, involves acceptance of a
pronouncement by virtue of the status of the person who offers it. The a priori method
relates to the acceptance of certain assumptions that lead to logically induced beliefs,
even if those assumptions are not questioned. Finally, the scientific method pertains to
the development of so-called permanent facts that exist independently of people and
their particular perspectives and beliefs.
Scientific Literacy
A scientifically literate student should be able to question the process by which information
develops. For example, for the question of how many adolescents smoke, students can
relate how the operational definitions of “smoker” and “adolescent” affect the conclusions
drawn by researchers. If asked, students should be able to identify assumptions and biases
underlying questions. There are sufficient sources of bad questions on surveys to give
students practice on taking apart and reassembling survey items.
Finally, students should know that real-world phenomena are very resistant to easy
cause-and-effect explanations. For example, if one examines teen pregnancy rates (The
National Campaign, 2002) and temperatures in the 50 states (NOAA Satellite and
Information Service, 2007) there is a correlation between the average temperature in a
state and the teen birth rate in the state. A simple causal statement about warmth,
scant clothing, sex, and pregnancy may come to students’ minds. However, there are
alternate explanations, including the fact that states with mandated emphasis on
abstinence in sex education curricula show the highest average teen pregnancy rates.
Here, too, a simple causal model comes to mind: Students who do not learn about
contraception end up pregnant. The problem is that the sex education–pregnancy link
is just as correlational as the temperature–pregnancy link. Scientifically literate students
should be able to generate multiple possible inferences and ways to test the validity of
those inferences.
Another facet of scientific literacy is being able to recognize what is scientific and what
is not. For instance, the Mozart effect (Rauscher, Shaw, & Ky, 1993, 1995) led to sensa-
tional media coverage in the 1990s. The supposed effect involved an increase in intelli-
gence when people listened to Mozart as opposed to stories. Subsequent studies failed to
replicate the effect and, in fact, identified some possible confounds (e.g., Steele, Bass, &
Brook, 1999; Thompson, Schellenberg, & Hussain, 2001), such as listeners’ preference
for such music. Students should be able to identify why the research on the so-called
Mozart effect was scientific, even though the phenomenon was illusory. Similarly, students
should have enough knowledge to assess the claims about facilitated communication (a
generally discredited technique for communicating with autistic individuals), or about
astrology. The criteria for scientific status are in the process of asking questions, not in the
topic of those questions per se.