Together we are strong: Explicit and implicit paranormal beliefs predict performance in a knowledge test of paranormal phenomena better than explicit beliefs alone

The belief in paranormal phenomena is a frequently studied topic. Studies predominantly assess explicit (i.e., conscious) parts of paranormal belief (PB) using questionnaire-based self-report measures which are prone to impression management and social desirability tendencies. In order to investigate the usefulness of measuring implicit (i.e., automatic) PB, we developed a PB Implicit Association Test (PB-IAT). Implicit PB was uncorrelated with explicit PB, but moderated the relationship between explicit PB and participants’ knowledge of paranormal phenomena. Participants with a weak implicit PB did not differ in their knowledge scores regardless of whether they had strong or weak explicit PB. But participants with strong implicit PB had higher scores when they also had strong explicit PB compared to participants with weak explicit PB. These results suggest that discrepant configurations of PB impair performance in a knowledge test about paranormal phenomena.     

Critical thinking ability and belief in the paranormal

A study was conducted to assess the relationship between critical thinking and belief in the paranormal. 180 students from three departments (psychology, arts, computer science) completed one measure of reasoning, the Paranormal Belief Scale (Tobacyk & Milford, 1983), and a scale of paranormal experiences. Half of the subjects filled out the Cornell Critical Thinking Test (Ennis & Millmann, 1985) and the Watson–Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (Watson & Glaser, 2002), respectively. The results show no significant correlations between critical thinking and paranormal belief or experiences. Reasoning ability, however, had a significant effect on paranormal belief scores, but not on paranormal experiences. Subjects with lower reasoning ability scored higher on Traditional Paranormal Belief and New Age Philosophy than did subjects with higher reasoning abilities. Results suggest that those who have better reasoning abilities scrutinise to a greater extent whether their experiences are sufficient justification for belief in the reality of these phenomena.     

A systematic review of the traits and cognitions associated with use of and belief in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM)

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use is widespread despite the controversy over its effectiveness. Although previous reviews have examined the demographics and attitudes of CAM users, there is no existing review on the traits or cognitions which characterise either CAM users or those who believe in CAM effectiveness. The current systematic review set out to address these gaps in the literature by applying a narrative synthesis. A bibliographic search and manual searches were undertaken and key authors were contacted. Twenty-three papers were selected. The trait openness to experience was positively associated with CAM use but not CAM belief. Absorption and various types of coping were also positively associated with CAM use and belief. No other trait was reliably associated with CAM use or belief. Intuitive thinking and ontological confusions were positively associated with belief in CAM effectiveness; intuitive thinking was also positively associated with CAM use. Studies researching cognitions in CAM use/belief were mostly on non-clinical samples, whilst studies on traits and CAM use/belief were mostly on patients. The quality of studies varied but unrepresentative samples, untested outcome measures and simplistic statistical analyses were the most common flaws. Traits and cognition might be important correlates of CAM use and also of faith in CAM.