Still the myths

Over on LinkedIn, about the last site worth visiting (I do use Bluesky and Mastodon, but they’re not really ‘sites’ so much as channels), I am still seeing quotes about people believing in misinformation. Learning styles, generations, attentions spans dropping, etc, all these things that aren’t valid are still being touted. Despite our debunking efforts, it’s still the myths!

To be fair, we do seem to be seeing a bit of an ‘anti-science’ movement. Which would be not only silly, but sad! Sure, there are problems with science, but it still beats every other process we have. Anecdotes don’t surpass real evidence, and personal opinion isn’t superior to what proper research tells us.

For one, as Naomi Oreskes makes clear in her book Why Trust Science, what makes science work isn’t just the process. So, yes, scientists conduct experiments, and others review them, and it’s a collective decision to publish them. And, yes, bad papers are still submitted (I used to serve on editorial boards, and my rejection rate was about 95%; but it was a good journal ;). Also, it’s hard to bring in new viewpoints. What Oreskes points out, however, and aptly, is that over time, these processes advance our understanding. We may have fits and spurts, but for the long game we win. For instance, how are you able to read this offering of mine, over miles and minutes? Because science.

So, science denial is counter-productive, but it exists. Gale Sinatra and colleague Barbara Hofer, in their book Science Denial, outline the reasons how this happens. Based upon research into the situation, they document our minds have biases, and how we can be swayed. We can also have our own beliefs, and our tendency to confirmation bias means we only look for evidence that supports our views. Fortunately, they discuss ways to address these problems, but we need to put some of these into place (as with Brian Klaas’ recommendations for fighting corruption).

We have good data that there are things we should avoid. There really aren’t any psychometrically valid instrument for learning styles, and no evidence that should use them if we did. Categorizing people by generations is, basically, a form of stereotyping. Our attentions spans can engage for hours even, as we play games, read novels, watch movies, etc. And so on!

Sometimes, it feels hopeless. But I look and see that we’re getting more attention to learning science. It really is about communication, and it seems we’re (slowly) making headway. So, I’ll keep keeping on (heck, I wrote the book!), despite ‘still the myths’. Hopefully, fewer and less over time. Fingers crossed!