You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Neuromyths in Education: Prevalence and Predictors of Misconceptions among Teachers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00429 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sanne Dekker, Nikki C. Lee, Paul Howard-Jones, Jelle Jolles |
| Abstract |
The OECD's Brain and Learning project (2002) emphasized that many misconceptions about the brain exist among professionals in the field of education. Though these so-called "neuromyths" are loosely based on scientific facts, they may have adverse effects on educational practice. The present study investigated the prevalence and predictors of neuromyths among teachers in selected regions in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. A large observational survey design was used to assess general knowledge of the brain and neuromyths. The sample comprised 242 primary and secondary school teachers who were interested in the neuroscience of learning. It would be of concern if neuromyths were found in this sample, as these teachers may want to use these incorrect interpretations of neuroscience findings in their teaching practice. Participants completed an online survey containing 32 statements about the brain and its influence on learning, of which 15 were neuromyths. Additional data was collected regarding background variables (e.g., age, sex, school type). Results showed that on average, teachers believed 49% of the neuromyths, particularly myths related to commercialized educational programs. Around 70% of the general knowledge statements were answered correctly. Teachers who read popular science magazines achieved higher scores on general knowledge questions. More general knowledge also predicted an increased belief in neuromyths. These findings suggest that teachers who are enthusiastic about the possible application of neuroscience findings in the classroom find it difficult to distinguish pseudoscience from scientific facts. Possessing greater general knowledge about the brain does not appear to protect teachers from believing in neuromyths. This demonstrates the need for enhanced interdisciplinary communication to reduce such misunderstandings in the future and establish a successful collaboration between neuroscience and education. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 567 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 102 | 18% |
| United States | 83 | 15% |
| Canada | 34 | 6% |
| Spain | 28 | 5% |
| Australia | 23 | 4% |
| Netherlands | 20 | 4% |
| Switzerland | 7 | 1% |
| Ireland | 6 | 1% |
| Brazil | 5 | <1% |
| Other | 48 | 8% |
| Unknown | 211 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 445 | 78% |
| Scientists | 89 | 16% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 24 | 4% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 9 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 932 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 12 | 1% |
| United States | 10 | 1% |
| Canada | 4 | <1% |
| France | 3 | <1% |
| Brazil | 3 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| Australia | 2 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 6 | <1% |
| Unknown | 888 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 151 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 124 | 13% |
| Researcher | 96 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 94 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 63 | 7% |
| Other | 209 | 22% |
| Unknown | 195 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 197 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 164 | 18% |
| Neuroscience | 67 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 49 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 32 | 3% |
| Other | 185 | 20% |
| Unknown | 238 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 685. 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 10 September 2023.
All research outputs
#31,135
of 25,724,500 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#49
of 34,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92
of 251,700 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#2
of 481 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,724,500 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,764 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. 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 251,700 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 481 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 99% of its contemporaries.