Alternative psychotherapies: Conceptual elucidation and epidemiological framework

This article elucidates and defines alternative psychotherapies, as well as describes the variables that explain why some professional psychologists are prone to endorse these practices. First, the novel concept of “complementary and alternative psychotherapies” (CAP) is defined within the framework of the established hierarchy of clinical evidence. Second, we report a literature review to aid understanding of the main variables explaining why some clinicians prefer CAP. We review rejection of scientific reasoning, misconceptions about human nature, and pragmatic limitations of evidence-based practice

The Parasites of Science. A Psycho-cognitive Characterization of a Pseudo-scientific Hoax

The theoretical framework of research on pseudoscience is deficient,since it usually includes other types of beliefs lacking epistemic warranty. In this paper, I review the mechanisms of exploitation of scientific authority by pseudoscience, developing a more refined psycho-cognitive framework to characterize the phenomenon. I will analyze the psychology of pseudoscientific deception, the cognitive roots that enable the epidemiology of these ideas and their mechanisms of self-legitimation, such as dialectical superiority, false external support or false ethical and/or epistemological superiority

Divan couches and gurus : the origin and dangers of clinical pseudopsychology

Pseudoscience is alarmingly present in the context of clinical psychology and is also very dangerous. As a set of pseudoscientific ideas, clinical pseudopsychology has a peculiar characteristic: it has established an entire tradition parallel to psychology, with numerous branches and interrelated theoretical and practical developments. In this paper we will review that tradition, from pseudoscientific hypnosis to psychoanalysis, and from New Age to present-day neuropseudoscience. We will then review some of the dangers of pseudoscience related to mental disorders

Dismantling yhe rhetoric of alternative medicine : smokescreens, errors, conspiracies, and follies

Alternative medicine has a high social prevalence, being promoted by well organized groups that have developed an intricate rhetoric in order to self-justify in the absence of evidence. This article will analyse some of these arguments, some of their fallacies ??ad populum, ad ignorantiam??, other styles of reasoning ??conspiracy theories?? and other misconceptions of scientific concepts ??placebo effect, scientific authority. The objective will be to highlight the poverty of the rhetoric of proponents of alternative medicine, with special emphasis on the dangers for the consumer

Los parásitos de la ciencia. Una caracterización psicocognitiva del engaño pseudocientífico

The theoretical framework of research on pseudoscience is deficient, since it usually includes other types of beliefs lacking epistemic warranty. In this paper, I review the mechanisms of exploitation of scientific authority by pseudoscience, developing a more refined psycho-cognitive framework to characterize the phenomenon. I will analyze the psychology of pseudoscientific deception, the cognitive roots that enable the epidemiology of these ideas and their mechanisms of self-legitimation, such as dialectical superiority, false external support or false ethical and/or epistemological superiority.; El marco teórico desde el cual se llevan a cabo investigaciones acerca de la pseudociencia es deficiente, dado que suele incluir otros tipos de creencias carentes de garantía epistémica. En este artículo, se repasarán los mecanismos de explotación de la autoridad científica por parte de la pseudociencia, desarrollando así un marco psicocognitivo más refinado para caracterizar el fenómeno. Se analizará la psicología del engaño pseudocientífico, las raíces cognitivas que posibilitan la epidemiología de este tipo de ideas y sus mecanismos de autolegitimación,como la superioridad dialéctica, el falso apoyo externo o la falsa superioridad ética y/o epistemológica

El problema de la demarcación ciencia/pseudociencia desde una perspectiva cognitiva

El proyecto parte desde las bases conceptuales o filosóficas de la pseudociencia (metacriterio y criterio de demarcación), desarrollando una herramienta demarcativa a fin de definir y cribar la pseudociencia. El segundo capítulo incluye tanto una elucidación del cuarto ítem del criterio de demarcación como la validación de una escala psicométrica para la medición de creencias pseudocientíficas. La escala, que presenta un alfa de Cronbach de .90, muestra una alta fiabilidad, así como un espectro temático que reconoce tanto la promoción de pseudo-teorías como al negacionismo de la ciencia dentro del mismo constructo psicológico. Por último, el tercer capítulo lo constituyen dos estudios que emplean todas estas herramientas conceptuales y psicométricas a fin de obtener evidencia empírica que permita comprender en mayor profundidad y fiabilidad la pseudociencia como fenómeno psicológico. Estos estudios se encargan tanto de comparar los perfiles psicológicos de los creyentes en pseudociencia en relación a los creyentes en otros tipos de creencias sin garantía epistémica (lo paranormal y las teorías de la conspiración), así como de analizar la relación existente entre este tipo de creencias y las diversas dimensiones de la alfabetización científica.The project starts from the conceptual or philosophical basis of pseudoscience (metacriterion and demarcation criterion), developing a demarcative tool in order to define and screen pseudoscience. The second chapter includes both an elucidation of the fourth item of the demarcation criterion and the validation of a psychometric scale for the measurement of pseudoscientific beliefs. The scale shows high reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.90) and two thematic subscales: pseudo-theory promotion and science denialism. Finally, the third chapter includes two studies using all these conceptual and psychometric tools in order to obtain empirical evidence to understand pseudoscience as a psychological construct. These studies compare the psychological profiles of believers in pseudoscience, the paranormal and conspiracy theories, analysing the relationships between these sets of beliefs and various dimensions of scientific literacy, as well as cognitive, personality and sociodemographic variables

Revised and short versions of the pseudoscientific belief scale

This is the pre-peer reviewed version of the following article: Fasce, A, Avendaño, D, Adrián‐Ventura, J. Revised and short versions of the pseudoscientific belief scale. Appl Cognit Psychol. 2021; 1– 5, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3811. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions.In this article, we develop the revised and short versions of the pseudoscientific belief scale through two empirical studies (N = 4154). This revision is motivated by the excessive length of the scale, as well as by consistent observations of poor item loadings across several studies. Exploratory factor analysis in Study 1 revealed 11 dispensable items, resulting in a 19‐item revised form, whereas in Study 2 we constructed a short eight‐item form. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed unidimensional factor structures for both scales, exhibiting excellent psychometric properties in relation to factor structure, item loadings, internal consistency and convergent validity with paranormal beliefs, conspiracy theories and need for uniqueness. Whereas the original scale provides reliable indices, we encourage the use of these improved versions to measure pseudoscientific beliefs in the context of socio‐psychological studies

Do as the Romans do: On the authoritarian roots of pseudoscience

Recent research highlights the implications of group dynamics in the acceptance and promotion of misconceptions, particularly in relation to the identity-protective attitudes that boost polarisation over scientific information. In this study, we successfully test a mediational model between right-wing authoritarianism and pseudoscientific beliefs. First, we carry out a comprehensive literature review on the socio-political background of pseudoscientific beliefs. Second, we conduct two studies (n=1189 and n=1097) to confirm our working hypotheses: H1 – intercorrelation between pseudoscientific beliefs, authoritarianism and three axioms (reward for application, religiosity and fate control); H2 – authoritarianism and social axioms fully explain rightists’ proneness to pseudoscience; and H3 – the association between pseudoscience and authoritarianism is partially mediated by social axioms. Finally, we discuss our results in relation to their external validity regarding paranormal and conspiracy beliefs, as well as to their implications for group polarisation and science communication

Who Seeks Alternative Psychotherapies? Domain-Specific Predictors and Latent Profiles

Techniques presented as psychotherapies without evidence for effective treatment constitute a long-standing and under-researched issue within clinical psychology. We report on an exploratory study using a cross-sectional sample (N = 538) to find predictors and profiles of use of complementary and alternative psychotherapies (CAP). Five well-established constructs were assessed: help-seeking preferences, psychiatric scepticism, mental health literacy, psychological mindedness, and psychotherapy expectancy. Religiosity, help-seeking, distrust in mental health care, interest in psychological phenomena, expectations of relationship with the psychotherapist, and belief in the effectiveness of alternative psychotherapies positively predicted use of CAP. Parallel analyses of evidence-based psychotherapies and alternative medicine revealed that some of these predictors are specific to CAP. Latent profile analysis identified three profiles among users of alternative psychotherapies, conceptualized as religious, unmotivated, and analytical. We discuss our results in relation to these profiles, suggesting various implications and lines of research