↓ Skip to main content

Paranormal psychic believers and skeptics: a large-scale test of the cognitive differences hypothesis

Overview of attention for article published in Memory & Cognition, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#16 of 1,666)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
twitter
41 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 Mendeley
Title
Paranormal psychic believers and skeptics: a large-scale test of the cognitive differences hypothesis
Published in
Memory & Cognition, October 2015
DOI 10.3758/s13421-015-0563-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephen J. Gray, David A. Gallo

Abstract

Belief in paranormal psychic phenomena is widespread in the United States, with over a third of the population believing in extrasensory perception (ESP). Why do some people believe, while others are skeptical? According to the cognitive differences hypothesis, individual differences in the way people process information about the world can contribute to the creation of psychic beliefs, such as differences in memory accuracy (e.g., selectively remembering a fortune teller's correct predictions) or analytical thinking (e.g., relying on intuition rather than scrutinizing evidence). While this hypothesis is prevalent in the literature, few have attempted to empirically test it. Here, we provided the most comprehensive test of the cognitive differences hypothesis to date. In 3 studies, we used online screening to recruit groups of strong believers and strong skeptics, matched on key demographics (age, sex, and years of education). These groups were then tested in laboratory and online settings using multiple cognitive tasks and other measures. Our cognitive testing showed that there were no consistent group differences on tasks of episodic memory distortion, autobiographical memory distortion, or working memory capacity, but skeptics consistently outperformed believers on several tasks tapping analytical or logical thinking as well as vocabulary. These findings demonstrate cognitive similarities and differences between these groups and suggest that differences in analytical thinking and conceptual knowledge might contribute to the development of psychic beliefs. We also found that psychic belief was associated with greater life satisfaction, demonstrating benefits associated with psychic beliefs and highlighting the role of both cognitive and noncognitive factors in understanding these individual differences.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 41 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Germany 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Unknown 94 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 13%
Student > Master 11 11%
Researcher 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 19 19%
Unknown 27 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 49 49%
Social Sciences 9 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Linguistics 2 2%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 30 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 137. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 February 2019.
All research outputs
#309,153
of 25,758,211 outputs
Outputs from Memory & Cognition
#16
of 1,666 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,347
of 296,097 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Memory & Cognition
#1
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,758,211 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,666 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 296,097 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.