Belief in Psychological Myths Among Students – A Comparison Between Psychology and Other Fields of Study

Objective: The popularization of unscientific content is becoming increasingly prevalent in the era of global internet access. Identifying and debunking psychological myths should be an essential part of the education of individuals training to become psychologists. This study examined whether there are differences in the identification of psychological myths between psychology students and students from other fields. Method: The study included 331 participants, consisting of 132 psychology students and 199 students from other disciplines. A questionnaire based on the work of Lilienfeld et al. (2017) was used to measure belief in psychological myths. The questionnaire consisted of 17 statements - 10 myths and 7 facts - which participants assessed for their validity through an online survey. Data were analyzed using independent samples t-tests. Results: Respondents’ answers indicated a small difference in the average number of correct responses between psychology students and students from other fields, with a moderate effect size. Conclusion: The results confirmed the hypothesis that psychology students are less likely to believe in psychological myths. However, the study also revealed that the incorrect identification of popular psychological myths is common among young people, indicating a need for educational intervention.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Przegląd Psychologiczny
Published
2024-12-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.31648/przegldpsychologiczny.11290
Primary Topic
Misinformation and Its Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Belief in Psychological Myths Among Students – A Comparison Between Psychology and Other Fields of Study

Agata Adamczyk, Hanna Barakat, Alicja Bejnar
Przegląd Psychologiczny
Misinformation and Its Impacts
article

Belief in Psychological Myths Among Students – A Comparison Between Psychology and Other Fields of Study

Agata Adamczyk, Hanna Barakat, Alicja Bejnar
article en

Abstract

Objective: The popularization of unscientific content is becoming increasingly prevalent in the era of global internet access. Identifying and debunking psychological myths should be an essential part of the education of individuals training to become psychologists. This study examined whether there are differences in the identification of psychological myths between psychology students and students from other fields. Method: The study included 331 participants, consisting of 132 psychology students and 199 students from other disciplines. A questionnaire based on the work of Lilienfeld et al. (2017) was used to measure belief in psychological myths. The questionnaire consisted of 17 statements - 10 myths and 7 facts - which participants assessed for their validity through an online survey. Data were analyzed using independent samples t-tests. Results: Respondents’ answers indicated a small difference in the average number of correct responses between psychology students and students from other fields, with a moderate effect size. Conclusion: The results confirmed the hypothesis that psychology students are less likely to believe in psychological myths. However, the study also revealed that the incorrect identification of popular psychological myths is common among young people, indicating a need for educational intervention.

Przegląd PsychologicznyVol. 67(4)
Maritime Institute in Gdansk (PL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 52%
Misinformation and Its Impacts
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.