Paul A Howard-Jones

Neuromyths in Education: Prevalence and Predictors of Misconceptions among Teachers

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.

Ideational Productivity, Focus of Attention, and Context

Creativity is vital to organizational success. Information technologies (IT) have increasingly become a major influence on organizational efficiency and effectiveness. However, there has been a paucity of research aimed at specifying the relationship between these two areas of scholarship. This article will begin to fill this gap by exploring the ways that IT might influence creativity in organizations. This is important for organizational studies, given that knowledge and information are among the most important ingredients for creativity and are the very things that IT exist to manage. In this article, the creativity literature and much of the management oriented IT literature will be explored to suggest that IT plays an integral role in the creative process within organizations. Specifically, the main benefits that IT affords organizations will be considered and then applied to the requirements for creative production, the stages of the individual creative process, the process of organizational learnin...The authors tested the hypothesis that a broad or narrow scope of perceptual attention engen- ders an analogously broad or narrow focus of concep- tual attention, which in turn bolsters or undermines creative generation. In the first two experiments, par- ticipants completed visual tasks that forced them to fo- cus perceptual attention on a comparatively broad or narrow visual area. As predicted, broad, compared to narrow initial focusing of perceptual attention subse- quently led to generation of more original uses for a brick (Experiment 1) and generation of more unusual category exemplars (Experiment 2). In Experiment 3, participants were merely asked to contract their frontalis versus corrugator muscles, producing rudi- mentary peripheral feedback associated with broad versus narrow perceptual focus. As predicted, frontalis contraction, relative to corrugator contraction, led to the production of more original uses for a pair of scis- sors. Together, these three experiments provided con- verging initial support for our attentional priming hypothesis, suggesting that situationally induced vari- ations in the scope of perceptual attention (and simple cues associated with such variations) may corre- spondingly expand or constrict the focus of conceptual attention within the semantic network, thereby improv- ing or diminishing creativity.This article picks up on the suggestion made by Mumford that the relationship of affect to creativity is an important, new trend in the field. Fuel is added to this argument by pointing to evidence indicating that tasks of creative thinking may be particularly mood sensitive. The main stream argument that positive mood unconditionally and reliably facilitates creativity is characterized as a case of premature closure. Evidence is reviewed that calls this general thesis into serious question. It is concluded that creativity is a multifaceted construct, and that different moods are differentially related to different components of creative thinking.Social innovations, new ideas about peoples interactions, have begun to receive more attention in studies of creativity. This article considers the conclusions emerging from two recent books examining the history of two notable 20th century social innovations--the development of scientific management and the use of standardized tests for college admissions. We examine the implications of these books with respect to three key topics, (a) the generation of creative ideas about social interactions, (b) the factors influencing development of these ideas, and (c) the social settings that lead to acceptance and diffusion of these ideas. The implications of these observations for understanding social innovation are discussed.Three decades of research have failed to produce general agreement concerning the effects of reward on creativity. We believe that the problem stems not from any great complexity of research findings, but primarily from the clash between romantic and behav- iorist worldviews concerning basic human nature. Iso- lation of these research camps has produced narrow perspectives and failures to correct persisting method- ological flaws. Research correcting these flaws sug- gests that rewards for novel performance increase intrinsic motivation and creativity, whereas rewards for conventional performance decrease intrinsic moti- vation and creativity. Creative motivational orienta- tion, enhanced by rewards, strongly affects innovative performance.The sciences are typically defined by empirical work.If a field does not conduct or value empirical work, itis “not very scientific.” Gould (2001) put it this way:“The task of science is twofold: to determine, as bestwe can, the empirical character of the natural world;and to ascertain why our world operates as it does,rather than in some other conceivable, but unrealized,way—in other words, to specify facts and validatetheories” (p. ix). In contemporary creative studies,many empirical papers are published each year,testing new and old hypotheses, and covering anincreasingly diverse range of topics. The field ofcreative studies has become very scientific in its useof rigorous empirical work, and this empirical workhas advanced the field, especially in the last 2decades. Yet scientific fields progress through self-examination, as well as through the collection of newdata. Such self-examination can be found in publishedreviews, especially if integrative. These can containsummaries of primary research and extensions (or re-jections) of a particular theory. Such self-examinationsare especially important as a field gains momentum,as has been the case in creative studies as of late.Mumford’s (2003) featured article in this issue oftheIn recent times, there are many areas of daily functioning when intuition is thought to serve a useful function, especially in regard to decision making and business. However, scientific research on the construct is sparse. This study aims to advance our understanding of the concept and measurement of intuition and to compare responses on 2 different types of measures of intuition in determining intuition from interests, personality, and experiences. Fifty-three first year psychology students completed the Myers-Briggs Type Inventory (MBTI) and the Accumulated Clues Task (ACT) to estimate their intuitive traits and ability. Participants also completed an intuitive interests measure and an intuitive experiences questionnaire. The 2 intuition measures were not related, suggesting that they may measure different dimensions of intuition or even different constructs. In general, intuitive interests, personality, and experiences predicted scores on MBTI Intuition but not ACT Intuition. Scores on the MBTI Intuit...This study investigated the cultural influences on creative and conforming behavior. Three sets of hypotheses were developed. First, it was predicted that there was a negative association between creative and conforming behavior (Hypothesis 1). Second, it was predicted that cultural individualism-collectivism had a positive impact on independent self-construal (Hypothesis 2A) and a negative impact on interdependent self-construal (Hypothesis 2B). Third, it was predicted that independent self-construal had a positive impact on creative behavior (Hypothesis 3A) and a negative impact on conforming behavior (Hypothesis 3B) and that interdependent self-construal had a negative impact on creative behavior (Hypothesis 3C) and a positive impact on conforming behavior (Hypothesis 3D). These hypotheses were embedded in a theoretical model of behavior with cultural individualism/collectivism as the antecedent variable, independent and interdependent self-construals as the mediating variables, and creative and confor...A series of 4 experiments were conducted to investigate ideational productivity. Experiments 1, 2, and 3 were carried out under controlled conditions and involved a test of ideational productivity based on producing different interpretations of a diagram. In the first experiment, the pattern of ideational produc- tivity of adult volunteer participants was studied over 30 min of thinking time. Experiment 2 investigated whether, as predicted by Mednick (1962), a negative correlation exists between the rate of change of pro- ductivity and the overall productivity of adult partici- pants. Results confirmed a significant correlation, providing further support for the connectionist model of creativity put forward by Martindale (1995). Ex- periment 3 measured the effect of a strategy that en- couraged adult volunteers to defocus their thinking before attempting to find another new interpretation of the diagram. On returning to the problem, the aver- age time taken to produce a new interpretation was significantly reduced. These results are discussed in terms of Martindales connectionist model and the role of context. Based on these findings, an instruc- tional strategy was devised that might support the ideational productivity of children. In Experiment 4, the effectiveness of such a strategy was investigated within the classroom environment for children aged 8 to 10 years, and was shown to be effective in raising their ideational productivity. A creative idea is generally considered to possess twoIn Mumfords (2003) review of 2 major creativity handbooks, he outlines how the field has advanced. New methodologies and research paradigms have enabled a wider variety of variables and questions to be investigated. These advances enable specific processes important to creativity to be studied. Cognitive and affective processes important in creativity are better understood and differentiated. As a result, we can learn about different profiles of creative individuals in different domains. Currently, there is no comprehensive theory of creativity. For theoretical advancement to occur, we need an interdisciplinary approach.Dreaming has been postulated to be a functional intrapersonal component of the creative experience. In this study, a previously validated questionnaire is used in a sleep laboratory population (N = 517) to assess levels of dream incorporation into waking behavior. Those responses are correlated with reported levels of involvement and self-defined types of the creative process. Greater involvement in creative process was significantly associated with greater incorporation of dreams into waking behavior. The reported types of creative outlet were divided for analysis between those with a creative product and those without product (experiential). The creative product grouping showed higher levels of reported dream incorporation into behavior than the experiential grouping, with both of these groupings reporting significantly higher levels of dream incorporation into waking behavior than the grouping reporting no creative outlet. Gender differences were found for both incorporation of dreaming into waking (si...

The neural mechanisms of learning from competitors

Learning from competitors poses a challenge for existing theories of reward-based learning, which assume that rewarded actions are more likely to be executed in the future. Such a learning mechanism would disadvantage a player in a competitive situation because, since the competitors loss is the players gain, reward might become associated with an action the player should themselves avoid. Using fMRI, we investigated the neural activity of humans competing with a computer in a foraging task. We observed neural activity that represented the variables required for learning from competitors: the actions of the competitor (in the players motor and premotor cortex) and the reward prediction error arising from the competitors feedback. In particular, regions positively correlated with the unexpected loss of the competitor (which was beneficial to the player) included the striatum and those regions previously implicated in response inhibition. Our results suggest that learning in such contexts may involve the competitors unexpected losses activating regions of the players brain that subserve response inhibition, as the player learns to avoid the actions that produced them.

Scepticism is not enough

Educators play an important role in developing the minds and brains of their learners. Little wonder then, that most have a natural enthusiasm to learn about concepts from neuroscience and apply them in their classrooms. Such enthusiasm may be fundamentally misplaced if neuroscience can make no practical contribution to education. Yet many areas of practical educational concern are being informed by neuroscientific research, including adolescent development, development in mathematics and reading, and understanding of the contribution of sleep and nutrition to learning (Howard-Jones, 2007). Increasingly, there is also an expectation for teachers to differentiate their approach according to the needs of individual learners, and this includes a growing proportion of pupils in mainstream classes identified as suffering developmental disorders. A recent meta-analysis suggests 4–10% of schoolage children suffer from ADHD, which is often controlled with powerful psychoactive drugs (Skounti et al., 2007). It seems unreasonable to suggest that an understanding of this disorder, in terms of the mind and the brain, cannot inform teachers in their approach. Teachers’ common-sense notion of the importance of the brain in education is further supported by the growing numbers of neuroscientists whose claims for the educational significance of their ideas extends well beyond their grant applications. Some neuroscientists refer to educational implications in the titles of their scientific publications (Posner and Rothbart, 2005), write books aimed at educators (Blakemore and Frith, 2005), produce articles for educational journals (Kaufmann, 2008) and even develop educational products (Wilson et al., 2006). Neuroscientists who make contact with the educational community, however, may be surprised by some of the ‘neuroscientific’ concepts they find already there. Decades without formal interdisciplinary communication have allowed many unscientific ‘brain-based’ ideas to become established in the classroom. Common educational practices and ideas

Education and Neuroscience

This Special Issue of Educational Research called for papers focusing on a new and exciting area of interdisciplinary research emerging at the interface between neuroscience and education. On the face of it, the need for such research appears obvious. If we are learning so much about the brain, surely this can help us improve education? Arguably, you might say teachers are the only professionals charged with the daily development of brain function, and one scientist (Koizumi 2004) has even suggested that education might be defined as a ‘nurturing of the brain’. Between 2005 and 2006, the ESRC-TLRP seminar series ‘Collaborative Frameworks in Neuroscience and Education’ brought together over 400 teachers, neuroscientists, psychologists and policy-makers to discuss the potential for collaborative work that might lead to improved educational and neuroscientific understanding. This Special Issue of the journal brings together and examines many of the issues and opportunities highlighted by the seminar series, by drilling down into just a few of many topics touched upon in the associated commentary (Howard-Jones 2007). Public interest in neuroscience and education has been considerable, as reflected by media coverage and the unprecedented accessing of the seminar series commentary (more than 110,000 downloads in the first 6 months). But this enthusiasm also brings with it dangers, as evidenced by the long-running success of entrepreneurs in constructing and promoting unscientific and unevaluated ‘brain-based’ pedagogy. It is appropriate, therefore, that the Special Issue should begin with a provocative article by John Geake scrutinising some of the most popular ideas about the brain to be found in today’s classroom. Geake examines ideas about using 10% of our brain, leftand right-brain thinking, Visual Auditory Kinaesthetic (VAK) learning styles and multiple intelligences (as they are often interpreted in education). All these concepts are appealing in their simplicity and may resonate with some educational viewpoints. However, while they have usually been inspired by something related to neuroscience, any scientific basis has been so seriously misinterpreted, over-interpreted and/or misapplied that they are classified here as ‘neuromyths’. By pulling the fallacies apart, Geake provides a convincing argument for developing a mutually comprehensible language and genuine interdisciplinary dialogue, in order to avoid these and future pitfalls. By the end of Geake’s article, the reader may be left asking: ‘if these were just neuromyths, then what are we learning about education and the brain that is genuine and important?’ In considerable contrast to the concepts critiqued by Geake, the next four papers in this Special Issue provide fascinating examples of how brain research is revealing insights about learning that have genuine implications for educational practice. Usha Goswami reviews what we know about the core neural systems involved with learning to read and the biological basis of developmental dyslexia. In so doing, Goswami highlights the complementary role of different brain imaging techniques in constructing this understanding, suggesting that future studies should draw selectively upon these techniques and approach difficult issues of causation through longitudinal design. As in other areas of educational interest, there are relatively few developmental studies of the Educational Research Vol. 50, No. 2, June 2008, 119–122

A Multiperspective Approach to Neuroeducational Research

There is increasing interest in research that combines neuroscientific and educational perspectives on learning, but significant philosophical issues divide these perspectives. This article examines the value of such neuroeducational research and how concepts from different perspectives may be interrelated through a ‘level of actions’ model. This model, which encourages a multiperspective approach, may be helpful in avoiding some of the worst transgressions of sense‐making in constructing concepts that span neuroscience and education. Application of the model is explored in the context of teaching strategies intended to foster creativity, and its affordances and limitations are discussed.

The potential relevance of cognitive neuroscience for the development and use of technology-enhanced learning

There is increasing interest in the application of cognitive neuroscience in educational thinking and practice, and here we review findings from neuroscience that demonstrate its potential relevance to technology-enhanced learning (TEL). First, we identify some of the issues in integrating neuroscientific concepts into TEL research. We caution against seeking prescriptive neuroscience solutions for TEL and emphasize the need, instead, to conceptualize TEL at several different levels of analysis (brain, mind and behaviour, including social behaviour). Our review emphasizes the possibility of combining TEL and neuroscience concepts in adaptive educational systems, and we consider instances of interdisciplinary technology-based interventions drawing on neuroscience and aimed at remediating developmental disorders. We also consider the potential relevance of findings from neuroscience for the development of artificial agency, creativity, collaborative learning and neural insights into how different types of multimodality may influence learning, which may have implications for the future developments of tangibles. Finally, we identify a range of reasons why dialogue between neuroscience and the communities involved with technology and learning is likely to increase in the future.

Gamification of Learning Deactivates the Default Mode Network.

We hypothesized that embedding educational learning in a game would improve learning outcomes, with increased engagement and recruitment of cognitive resources evidenced by increased activation of working memory network (WMN) and deactivation of default mode network (DMN) regions. In an fMRI study, we compared activity during periods of learning in three conditions that were increasingly game-like: Study-only (when periods of learning were followed by an exemplar question together with its correct answer), Self-quizzing (when periods of learning were followed by a multiple choice question in return for a fixed number of points) and Game-based (when, following each period of learning, participants competed with a peer to answer the question for escalating, uncertain rewards). DMN hubs deactivated as conditions became more game-like, alongside greater self-reported engagement and, in the Game-based condition, higher learning scores. These changes did not occur with any detectable increase in WMN activity. Additionally, ventral striatal activation was associated with responding to questions and receiving positive question feedback. Results support the significance of DMN deactivation for educational learning, and are aligned with recent evidence suggesting DMN and WMN activity may not always be anti-correlated.

Reward, learning and games

The link between reward and learning has chiefly been studied scientifically in the context of reinforcement learning. This type of learning, which relies upon midbrain dopaminergic response, differs greatly from the learning valued by educators, which typically involves declarative memory formation. However, with recent insights regarding the modulation of hippocampal function by midbrain dopamine, scientific understanding of the midbrain response to reward may be becoming more relevant to education. Here, we consider the potential for our current understanding of reward to inform educational learning, and consider its implications for game-like interventions in the classroom.

Researching Adaptivity for Individual Differences in Numeracy Games

There is increasing evidence that mathematics video games can play a large role in mathematics education, in support of childrens learning. However, despite the interdisciplinary nature of the subject, research in this area has traditionally been fragmented between disciplines. The RAIDING project was conceived to bring together researchers in neuroscience, maths cognition, and game-based learning to develop a maths game that can act as a research platform for furthering knowledge in this field. The game will employ free-to-play design elements, alongside an adaptive learner model to investigate how children learn maths, through a range of empirical studies.