Sad… how inaccurate are introductory psychology textbooks? #urbanmyths

Long live Twitter as sometimes it can be a source of pretty depressing studies, like this tweet:

It’s good that some myths aren’t covered, but that still many myths persist in introductory textbooks is a call to action.

This study is a nice follow up to the teacher training report earlier this year, do check the abstract:

The introductory psychology class represents the first opportunity for the field to present new students with a comprehensive overview of psychological research. Writing introductory psychology textbooks is challenging given that authors need to cover many areas they themselves may not be intimately familiar with. This challenge is compounded by problems within the scholarly community in which controversial topics may be communicated in ideological terms within scholarly discourse. Psychological science has historically seen concerns raised about the mismatch between claims and data made about certain fields of knowledge, apprehensions that continue in the present “replication crisis.” The concern is that, although acting in good faith, introductory psychology textbook authors may unwittingly communicate information to readers that is factually untrue. Twenty-four leading introductory psychology textbooks were surveyed for their coverage of a number of controversial topics (e.g., media violence, narcissism epidemic, multiple intelligences) and scientific urban legends (e.g., Kitty Genovese, Mozart Effect) for their factual accuracy. Results indicated numerous errors of factual reporting across textbooks, particularly related to failing to inform students of the controversial nature of some research fields and repeating some scientific urban legends as if true. Recommendations are made for improving the accuracy of introductory textbooks.

Advertisements

3 Comments

Filed under Education, Myths, Psychology, Research, Review

3 responses to “Sad… how inaccurate are introductory psychology textbooks? #urbanmyths

  1. Pingback: Hoe kan je zien dat je handboek of cursus psychologie aan vervangen toe is? | X, Y of Einstein?

  2. Pingback: Hoe kan je zien dat je handboek of cursus psychologie aan vervangen toe is? | Blogcollectief Onderzoek Onderwijs

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s