Paranormal beliefs and cognitive function: A systematic review and assessment of study quality across four decades of research
📄 Original study ↗📌 Appears in:
Plain English Summary
Do paranormal believers think differently? This big review examined 71 studies spanning four decades and nearly 21,000 participants. The answer is a consistent yes: two-thirds found believers perform worse on cognitive tasks. The standout finding? Every study testing thinking style found believers lean on gut intuition over analytical reasoning. Believers also showed more confirmation bias, struggled with logical reasoning, and had trouble spotting randomness. The authors propose a tidy explanation: these scattered weaknesses may trace back to weaker executive function -- the brain's CEO managing planning and flexible thinking. But the field itself needs work. Only 3% of studies were preregistered, 7% calculated needed sample sizes, and 63% relied on college students. Studies averaged 43 statistical tests while barely correcting for multiple comparisons -- a recipe for false positives.
Research Notes
First systematic review of this literature since Irwin (1993). Key methodological critique: field relies heavily on undergraduate samples (63%), lacks preregistration (3%), and fails to correct for multiple comparisons despite averaging 43 p-values per study. Proposes fluid-executive model as parsimonious explanation for cognitive deficits. Important for understanding individual-differences approach to psi belief, though does not directly test psi phenomena. Senior author Keith Laws has published extensively on cognitive neuropsychology and psi methodology.
Systematic review of 71 studies (N=20,993) examining associations between paranormal beliefs and cognitive functioning published 1980-2021. Study quality was assessed using the AXIS tool. Results show 75% of studies rated good-to-strong quality, with quality improving over time. Most consistent findings: paranormal belief associated with increased intuitive thinking style (8/8 studies), increased confirmatory bias, poorer conditional reasoning, and reduced perception of randomness. Two-thirds of studies document poorer cognitive performance in believers. Major methodological weaknesses identified: only 7% included a-priori power analyses, 3% preregistered, 63% used undergraduate samples, 17% corrected for multiple comparisons. Authors propose a fluid-executive model suggesting disparate cognitive deficits may reflect common underlying executive dysfunction.
Links
Related Papers
More in Methodology
Paranormal belief, conspiracy endorsement, and positive wellbeing: a network analysis
Planning Falsifiable Confirmatory Research
Addressing Researcher Fraud: Retrospective, Real-Time, and Preventive Strategies — Including Legal Points and Data Management That Prevents Fraud
Quantum Aspects of the Brain-Mind Relationship: A Hypothesis with Supporting Evidence
Experimental evidence of non-classical brain functions
📋 Cite this paper
Dean, Charlotte E, Akhtar, Shazia, Gale, Tim M, Irvine, Karen, Grohmann, Dominique, Laws, Keith R (2022). Paranormal beliefs and cognitive function: A systematic review and assessment of study quality across four decades of research. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0267360
@article{dean_2022_paranormal_beliefs_cognition,
title = {Paranormal beliefs and cognitive function: A systematic review and assessment of study quality across four decades of research},
author = {Dean, Charlotte E and Akhtar, Shazia and Gale, Tim M and Irvine, Karen and Grohmann, Dominique and Laws, Keith R},
year = {2022},
journal = {PLoS ONE},
doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0267360},
}