Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Perceptual, Attentional, and Cognitive Heuristics That Interact with the Nature of Science to Complicate Public Understanding of Science

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Advances in Nature of Science Research

Abstract

Increasingly science is conducted in the public eye and research findings are made available to the public as they are being discovered—affording the opportunity to more quickly take advantage of new findings in our everyday lives. However, along with this “opportunity” come significant challenges and potential costs. A substantial body of research reveals patterns of perception, attention, and reasoning that interact with how we interpret and attach salience to research findings, and that work against public attention and understanding. Further, the epistemology of science—how scientific knowledge is vetted over time and through the discourse of many different scientists—makes it problematic to take the public “along for the ride.” This chapter considers a set of perceptual and attentional patterns, cognitive heuristics for causal reasoning, and assumptions about the nature of science that interact with people’s understanding of research findings. It argues that advancing a scientific research agenda increasingly calls for knowledge of how the public is inclined to interact with research findings and with the nature of science more generally.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. (2004). Report to congress, Tar Creek superfund site. Retrieved October 5, 2010, from http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/sites/tarcreek/tarcreekreport-toc.html

  • Bargh, J.A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 230–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, H. (1992). Scientific literacy and the myth of the scientific method. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, M. H., & Joseph, J. G. (1988). AIDS and behavioral change to reduce risk: A review. American Journal of Public Health, 78(4), 394–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beesley, B. (Producer/Director), Brannum, J. (Producer/Director), & Payne, J. (Producer/Editor). (2006). The creek runs red. The Creek Runs Red, LLC and KERA-Dallas/Fort Worth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, J. (2008, August 28). Subconscious decisions: Voting in churches and buying designer labels. Scientific American. Retrieved March 20, 2009, from http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=subconscious-decisions

  • Bettelheim, B. (1967). The empty fortress: Infantile Autism and the birth of the self. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanchette, I. (2006). Snakes, spiders, guns, and syringes: How specific are evolutionary constraints on the detection of threatening stimuli? Quantitative Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(8), 1484–1504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchen, L. (2008, December 10). The science of finding a face in a crowd: Discrete brain sections form a dedicated network to recognize faces. Scientific American. Retrieved March 20, 2009, from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-science-of-finding-a-face

  • Cave, K., & Bichot, N. P. (1999). Visuospatial attention: Beyond a spotlight model. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6(2), 204–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chalmers, A. F. (1999). What is this thing called science? Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chawla, D., Rees, G., & Friston, K. J. (1999). The physiological basis of attentional modulation in the extrastriate visual areas. Nature of Neuroscience, 2(7), 671–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. (2000, April). Misunderstanding emergent processes as causal. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association (AERA) Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damasio, A. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York: Putnam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doran, P. (2006, July 27). Cold, hard facts: Corrections appended. New York Times, Op-Ed Section.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doran, P. T., Priscu, J. C., Lyons, B., Walsh, J. E., Fountain, A. G., McKnight, D. M., et al. (2002). Antarctic climate cooling and terrestrial ecosystem response. Nature, 415(6871), 517–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eastwood, J. D., Smilek, D., & Merikle, P. M. (2001). Differential attentional guidance by unattended faces expressing positive and negative emotion. Perceptual Psychopsychology, 63(6), 1004–1013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egly, R., Driver, J., & Rafal, R. D. (1994). Shifting visual attention between objects and locations—Evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123(2), 161–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feltovich, P. J., Spiro, R. J., & Coulson, R. L. (1993). Learning, teaching, and testing for complex conceptual understanding. In N. Frederiksen & I. Bejar (Eds.), Test theory for a new generation of tests (pp. 181–217). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrari, M., & Chi, M. T. C. (1998). The nature of naïve explanations of natural selection. International Journal of Science Education, 20(10), 1231–1256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finucane, M. L., Alhakami, A., Slovic, P., & Johnson, S. M. (2000). The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gagnepain, P., Lebreton, K., Desgranges, B., & Eustache, F. (2008). Perceptual priming enhances the creation of new episodic memories. Consciousness and Cognition, 17(1), 276–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, S. M., Weaver, K., Moskowitz, G. B., & Darley, J. M. (2002). Crowded minds: The implicit bystander effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(4), 843–853.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, D. (2008). The science of fear. New York: Plume/Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilovich, T. (1991). How we know what isn’t so: The fallibility of human reason in everyday life. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimes, J. (1996). On the failure to detect changes in scenes across saccades. In K. Akins (Ed.), Perception: Vol. 2, Vancouver studies in cognitive science (pp. 89–110). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grotzer, T. A. (2000, April). How conceptual leaps in understanding the nature of causality can limit learning: An example from electrical circuits. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association (AERA) Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grotzer, T. A. (2003). Learning to understand the forms of causality implicit in scientific explanations. Studies in Science Education, 39(1), 1–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grotzer, T. A. (2004, October). Putting science within reach: Addressing patterns of thinking that limit science learning. Principal Leadership, 17–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grotzer, T. A. (2009). Learning to reason about evidence and explanations: Promising directions in education. In E. Callan, T. A. Grotzer, J. Kagan, R. E. Nisbett, D. N. Perkins, & L. S. Shulman (Eds.), Education and a civil society: Teaching evidence-based decision making (pp. 51–74). Cambridge, MA: American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grotzer, T. A., & Basca, B. B. (2003). How does grasping the underlying causal structures of ecosystems impact students’ understanding? Journal of Biological Education, 38(1), 16–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grotzer, T. A., & Lincoln, R. (2007). Educating for “intelligent environmental action” in an age of global warming. In S. C. Moser & L. Dilling (Eds.), Creating a climate for change: Communicating climate change and facilitating social change (pp. 266–280). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Guisasola, J. Almudí, J. M., & Furió, C. (2005). The nature of science and its implications for physics textbooks: The case of classical magnetic field theory. Science & Education, 14(3–5), 321–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haines, R. F. (1991). A breakdown in simultaneous information processing. In G. Obrecht & L. W. Stark (Eds.), Presbyopia research: From molecular biology to visual adaptation (pp. 171–175). New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heitz, R. P., & Engle, R. W. (2007). Focusing the spotlight: Individual differences in visual attention control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136(2), 217–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinojosa, J. A., Pozo, M. A., Méndez-Bértolo, C., & Luna, D. (2009). Event-related potential correlates of visual identity negative priming unbiased by trial-by-trial effects. Brain and Cognition, 69(3), 531–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Pfeffer, M. G., & Malhotra, B. A. (2003, April). Fish swim and rocks sit: Understanding structures, behaviors, and functions in a complex system. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association (AERA) Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopfinger, J. B., Buonocore, M. H., & Mangun, G. R. (2000). The neural mechanisms of top-down attentional control. Nature of Neuroscience, 3(3), 284–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houghton, C., Record, K., Bell, B., & Grotzer, T. A. (2000, April). Conceptualizing density with a relational systemic model. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), New Orleans, LA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibbotson, M. R., Crowder, N. A., Cloherty, S. L., Price, N. S. C., & Mustari, M. J. (2008). Saccadic modulation of neural responses: Possible roles in saccadic suppression, enhancement and time compression. Journal of Neuroscience, 28(43), 10952–10960.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson R. (2000). Guidelines on preventing cardiovascular disease in clinical practice. British Medical Journal, 320(7236), 659–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.). (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kastner, S., & McMains, S. A. (2007). Out of the spotlight: Face to face with attention. Nature Neuroscience, 10(11), 1344–1345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kastner, S., & Ungerleider, L. G. (2000). Mechanisms of visual attention in the human cortex. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 23, 315–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keheley, E. (2006, March). The history of the Picher mining field. Paper presented at the 40th Annual Meeting of the Geological Society of America Conference, March 6–7, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kimball, M., Stogsdill, S., & Palmer, J. (2008, May 11). Death toll at 6, all others accounted for. NewsOK. Retrieved September 27, 2010, from http://newsok.com/article/3242169

  • Koslowski, B. (1996). Theory and evidence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamme, V. A. F. (2003). Why visual attention and awareness are different. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(1), 12–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LeDoux, J. E. (1996). The emotional brain. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • LeDoux, J. E. (2000). Emotion circuits in the brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 23, 155–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LeDoux, J. E. (2007). The amygdala. Current Biology, 17(20), R868–R874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LeDoux, J. (n.d.). Fearful brains in the age of terror. Retrieved September 20, 2010, from http://www.cns.nyu.edu/ledoux/slide_show/Slide_show_age_of_terrow.htm

  • Linn, M., & Songer, N. (1993). How do students make sense? Merrill Palmer Quarterly, 39(1), 47–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luza, K. V. (1986). Stability problems associated with abandoned underground mines in the Picher field Northeastern Oklahoma. Oklahoma Geological Survey Circular, 88, 114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mack, A., & Rock, I. (1998). Inattentional blindness. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinez-Conde, S., Macknik, S. L., & Hubel, D. H. (2004). The role of fixational eye movements in visual perception. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5(3), 229–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez-Conde, S., Macknik, S. L., Troncoso, G., & Dyar, T. A. (2006). Microsaccades counteract visual fading during fixation. Neuron, 49(2), 297–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McConkie, G. W., & Currie, C. B. (1996). Visual stability across saccades while viewing complex pictures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 22(3), 563–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKee, S. A., Nhean, S., Hinson, R. E., & Mase, T. (2006). Smoking for weight control: Effect of priming for body image in female restrained eaters. Addictive Behaviors, 31(12), 2319–2323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moray, N. (1959). Attention in dichotic listening: Affective cues and influence of instructions. Quantitative Journal of Experimental Psychology, 11(1), 56–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, M. G., Slovic, P., Nair, I., Geisler, D., MacGregor, D., Fischhoff, B., et al. (1985). Powerline frequency electric and magnetic fields: A pilot study of risk perception. Risk Analysis, 5(2), 139–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrone, C., & Burr, D. (2006). Visual stability during saccadic eye movements. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The cognitive neurosciences (pp. 511–524). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Most, S. B., Scholl, B. J., Clifford, E. R., & Simons, D. J. (2005). What you see it what you set: Sustained inattentional blindness and the capture of attention. Psychological Review, 112(1), 217–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, N. G., & Ebeling, D. (2008). Attention-modulated activity in visual cortex—more than a simple “spotlight.” Neuroimage, 40(2), 818–827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers, J., & Gillham, O. (2006, February 1). Tar Creek: Inhofe: Report changes outlook: A corps finding that more that 200 sites could collapse prompts a re-assessment of buyouts. Tulsa World. Tulsa, OK.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC). (1995). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Retrieved June 30, 2007, from http://www.nap.edu/readingroom/books/nses/

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). (2000, July). Position statement: The nature of science. Retrieved September 24, 2010, from http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/natureofscience.aspx

  • Neuberger, J. S., Mulhall, M., Pomatto, M. C., Sheverbush, J., & Hassanein, R. S. (1990). Health problems in Galena, Kansas: A heavy metal mining Superfund site. Science of the Total Environment, 94, 261–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nickerson, R., Perkins, D., & Smith, E. (1985). The teaching of thinking. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohman, A., Flykt, A., & Esteves, F. (2001). Emotion drives attention: Detecting the snake in the grass. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 130(3), 466–478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborn, M. (2006, March). Elevated blood lead levels in small children at the Tar Creek superfund site. Paper presented at the 40th Annual Meeting of the Geological Society of America Conference, March 6–7, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pepine, C. J. (2003). Optimizing lipid management in patients with acute coronary syndromes. American Journal of Cardiology, 91(4A), 30B–35B.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D. N., & Grotzer, T. A. (2005). Dimensions of causal understanding: The role of complex causal models in students’ understanding of science. Studies in Science Education, 41(1), 117–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickering, M. J., & Branigan, H. P. (1999). Syntactic priming in language production. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(4), 136–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posner, M. I., Snyder, C. R. R., & Davidson, B. J. (1980). Attention and the detection of signals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109(2), 160–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prohanska, T. R., Albrecht, G., Levy, J. A., Sugrue, N., & Kim, J. H. (1990). Determinants of self-perceived risk for AIDS. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 31(4), 384–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rensink, R. A., O’Regan, J. K., & Clark, J. J. (1997). To see or not to see: The need for attention to perceive changes in scenes. Psychological Science, 8(5), 368–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, M. (1996). Beyond the centralized mindset. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandoval, W. A. (2003). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students’ scientific explanations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 5–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandoval, W. A. (2005). Understanding students’ practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 89(4), 634–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (2004). Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88(3), 345–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapin, S. (1992). Why the public ought to understand science in the making. Public Understanding of Science, 1(1), 27–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shermer, M. (2009, May 19). Why people believe invisible agents control the world. Scientific American. Retrieved September 16, 2010, from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=skeptic-agenticity

  • Simons, D. J., & Levin, D. T. (1998). Failure to detect changes to people during a real-world interaction. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5(4), 644–649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P. (2000). The perception of risk. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1982a). Why study risk perception? Risk Analysis, 2(2), 83–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1982b). Facts versus fears: Understanding perceived risk. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 463–489). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (2000). Cognitive processes and social risk-taking. In P. Slovic (Ed.), The perception of risk (pp. 32–50). London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P., Monahan, J., & MacGregor, D. G. (2000). Violent risk assessment and risk communication. Law and Behavior, 24(3), 271–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, C. L., Maclin, D., Houghton, C., & Hennessey, M. G. (2000). Sixth-grade students’ epistemologies of science: The impact of school science experiences on epistemological development. Cognition & Instruction, 18(3), 349–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sterman, J., & Booth-Sweeney, L. (2002). Cloudy skies: Assessing public understanding of global warming. Systems Dynamics Review, 18(2), 207–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C. R. (2002). Risk and reason: Safety, law, and the environment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teige-Mocigemba, S., & Klauer, K. C. (2008). “Automatic” evaluation? Strategic effects on affective priming. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(5), 1414–1417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tipper, S. P., & Behrmann, M. (1996). Object-centered not scene-based visual neglect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22(5), 1261–1278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treisman, A. (2009). Attention: Theoretical and psychological perspectives. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The cognitive neurosciences (pp. 189–204). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), 207–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 3–20). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Tulsa District, Subsidence Evaluation Team. (2006). Picher mining field, Northeast Oklahoma, subsidence evaluation report. Retrieved October 5, 2010, from http://www.swt.usace.army.mil/LIBRARY/libraryDetail.cfm?ID=208

  • Vuilleumier, P. (2005). How brains beware: Neural mechanisms of emotional attention. Trends in Cognitive Science, 9(12), 585–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, R. C., & Davies, A. A. (2008). Attention set for number: Expectation and perceptual load in inattentional blindness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34(5), 1092–1107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilensky, U., & Resnick, M. (1999). Thinking in levels: A dynamic systems approach to making sense of the world. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8(1), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamasaki, H., LaBar, K. S., & McCarthy, G. (2002). Dissociable prefrontal brain systems for attention and emotion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(17), 11447–11451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zehr, S. (1999). Scientists’ representation of uncertainty. In S. M. Friedman, S. Dunwoody, & C. L. Rogers (Eds.), Communicating uncertainty: Media coverage of new and controversial science (pp. 3–21). Mahwah, NJ: LEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zemack-Rugar, Y., Bettman, J. R., & Fitzsimmons, G. J. (2007). The effects of non-consciously priming emotion concepts on behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(6), 927–939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA

    Tina A. Grotzer, Rebecca B. Miller & Rebecca A. Lincoln

Authors
  1. Tina A. Grotzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rebecca B. Miller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rebecca A. Lincoln
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tina A. Grotzer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Bahrain Teachers College, Manama, Bahrain

    Myint Swe Khine

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Grotzer, T.A., Miller, R.B., Lincoln, R.A. (2012). Perceptual, Attentional, and Cognitive Heuristics That Interact with the Nature of Science to Complicate Public Understanding of Science. In: Khine, M. (eds) Advances in Nature of Science Research. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2457-0_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation