A. The sustainability of Neuromyths

Grospietsch and Mayer (2021a) argues that neuromyths can spread rapidly, can be highly resistant to change, and can be facilitated or strengthened by the some backfire effects. For istance, that is happening because the mere mention of a memorable scientific myth can lead to its long-term retention (familiarity backfire effect). Moreover too many scientific arguments against a scientific myth can make the more simply formulated myth seem even more attractive (overkill backfire effect). In addition when people are strongly convinced of a scientific myth, their processing of counterarguments may be skewed, leading – whether consciously or unconsciously – to a further strengthening of the scientific myth (worldview backfire effect).

Paul A. Howard-Jones (2014) says that that Neuromyths are misconceptions about the brain that flourish when cultural conditions protect them from scrutiny. Some long-standing neuromyths are present in products for educators and this has helped them to spread in classrooms across the world. Genuine communication between neuroscience and education has developed considerably in recent years, but many of the biases and conditions responsible for neuromyths still remain and can be observed hampering efforts to introduce ideas about the brain into educational thinking.