Honors 141-01: Science and Pseudoscience
Syllabus for Fall 2001

Professor: Sharon Hutchins
E-mail: hutchins@denison.edu

Why am I teaching this course?
The rate of scientific discovery and technology development is increasing exponentially. No single individual can keep up with all of these changes, yet many have a profound impact on our lives. One might imagine that curiosity about and knowledge of science would increase as the influence of science grows. Paradoxically however, research consistently finds that the American average citizenÕs understanding of the basic principles of science is decreasing. Fewer and fewer citizens can understand the basis of scientific discoveries and thus cannot distinguish between good science and junk. Similarly, fewer and fewer people can contribute meaningfully to discussions about the use of scientific discoveries (such as cloning and genetic manipulation). This public ignorance leaves our society vulnerable to being misguided by well-meaning but ill-informed individuals as well as to exploitation by cynical con artists. In addition, confusion and disagreement about the characteristics and scope of science and other ways of knowing (such as religion) has added fuel to many heated debates over public policies.

What opportunities does this course offer?
This course is designed to provide students with some of the skills necessary to critically evaluate claims made about human behavior, health, and the natural world, particularly those involving fringe science, the paranormal, and other unusual claims. We will look at the differences between science, pseudoscience, and other ways of thought. We will examine human thought processes, paying particular attention to their fallibility and irrationality. We will also learn about the scientific methods and techniques that can compensate for these limitations in human thought. We will consider the limits as well as the benefits of science. Throughout the course, we will emphasize the mastery of the basics of experimental design that can be applied to investigate a vast number of phenomena. To help master these techniques and hone critical thinking skills, we will read about othersÕ investigations of psychological and biological phenomena, as well as practice skills in a series of laboratory studies. The topics we will examine together include measurement of personality, astrology, ESP, false/recovered memory, extraterrestrial life and alien abduction, the healing powers of magnets and other alternative medicines, and creation science and evolution. The course will culminate in the design, conduct, analysis, and presentation of group projects on particular phenomena of interest.

What are the course goals?
The course is designed to give you the opportunity to recognize and articulate the characteristics of the scientific method and to use science to test new claims that you encounter. Readings from different points of view will allow you to hone critical thinking skills as well as develop your own conclusions. The course will help you become an informed consumer of products, claims, and ideas of all kinds.

How do you take advantage of the opportunities and attain the course goals?
This course is a seminar as well as a laboratory class. Therefore, the quality of the course will be heavily dependent upon student preparation for and participation in class activities. Regularly, a team of students will be in charge of summarizing extra readings on a particular topic and facilitating general discussion on that topic. To prepare for class discussions each student will write and hand in a one-page reaction to one selected reading before class discussion takes place. Hands-on laboratory sessions will occur nearly each week, usually in the first hour or so of the class session on Mondays (see attached schedule). Your regular attendance at and engagement in all activities is expected.

How will you and I know how well you are attaining the course goals?
Your performance on a broad range of activities using a variety of skills will be assessed. These activities are:

Quizzes: Two short (20 minute) quizzes will test your mastery of the concepts presented in Unit 1 that represent the foundation of the course. Each quiz will be given at the start of class on Monday and will cover material from the previous weeks.

Oral Presentation and Facilitation of Discussion: Twice during the semester, you will work with others to prepare a class presentation and to facilitate discussion. The presentations will begin with each of two teams presenting a brief (8-12 minutes total) summary of 2 to 3 extra readings on a particular topic. The two teams should coordinate their presentations in advance and prepare a list of questions designed to facilitate discussion. Presentations will begin in Unit 2. A list of topics will be circulated so that you can list your preferences for the topics.

Contribution to Class Discussion: You are asked to contribute to class discussions in two ways. First, you will write a single-page reaction paper to one of the core readings for each week. This reaction paper will be due at the beginning of class on Wednesday. Second, you will be expected to read carefully all core sources and to offer substantive contributions (i.e. more than personal opinion or experience) to the class discussion. Participation in the discussion will be evaluated in terms of quality rather than quantity. Feedback on your contributions will be offered periodically throughout the semester.

Laboratory Reports: For each laboratory project we complete (except the first), you will write a laboratory report. Before the end of most lab sessions, the course assistant will summarize our findings (and run any necessary statistical tests) so that you can take home the results along with the questions to address in your laboratory report. Typed, double-spaced laboratory reports are due at the beginning of class as noted on the syllabus. Guidelines for these reports will be distributed early in the semester.

Application Paper: On your own, you will write a 3- to 5-page paper on the applications of the course material to some real world problem or event. The scope of this assignment is relatively wide. The paper may focus on a campus lecture or colloquium, a media presentation of a controversial topic, or a local. Topics must be approved by me by Monday, September 24. Guidelines for the paper will be distributed early in the semester.

Group Project Paper: In a small group, you will design, conduct, and analyze and interpret the findings of an experiment testing an issue of interest to you. To help you design the project, you will jointly research and write a 3- to 5-page summary of scientific and non-scientific (including media) sources on the topic several weeks before your group begins to collect data (see attached schedule). The paper must include a bibliography, containing a minimum of 4 scientific sources and 4 additional sources on the subject.

Group Project Poster Presentation: In the last week of classes, your group will present your project (the research question, hypothesis, methods, results and importance) at the Psychology DepartmentÕs Poster Fair on December 6 (4:30-5:30 PM). Guidelines for content and format of the poster will be distributed as the group project unit begins.

Group Project Participation: The significance of your contributions to your group project will be assessed by each member of your group. Points will be assigned by averaging the scores awarded you by each group member (including yourself). You will have the opportunity to earn points toward your class grade in the following manner:

Contribution to Class Discussion 100 possible points
Quizzes (2 x 30) 60 possible points
Oral Presentations (2 x 50) 100 possible points
Laboratory Reports 175 possible points
Application Paper 40 possible points
Group Project Paper 25 possible points
Group Project Presentation 75 possible points
Group Project Participation 25 possible points
TOTAL 600 possible points

Grades will be assigned as follows: 90%-100% = A range; 80%-89% = B range; 70%-79% = C range; 60%-69% = D range; below 60% = F. If your average falls within the top 3% of a category (e.g. 87%-89%) you will be given a "plus" grade (e.g. B+). If your average falls within the bottom 3% of a category (e.g. 80%-82%) you will be given a "minus" grade (e.g., B-).

What are the rights and responsibilities of each member of this class?

• Academic Honesty: Academic honesty is the foundation of scholarly endeavor. You are expected to be familiar with and abide by Denison UniversityÕs and the Psychology DepartmentÕs policies on plagiarism. Much of the work in this class will be of a collaborative nature. However, you are expected to take the quizzes and write the laboratory reports and application paper entirely on your own. Cases of plagiarism or collaboration with peers on these assignments will result in a grade of F for this class.
• Timely Work: Late assignments will lose points. If the assignment is handed in within 24 hours of the due date, 20% of the points will be deducted. After 24 hours, no late assignments will be accepted. If exceptional circumstances make it difficult for you to complete an assignment on time, notify me well in advance, and I may grant you an extension, at my discretion.
• Class Attendance and Participation: Your regular attendance and engagement in all activities is expected. Four or more absences for any reason will result in the failure to earn credit for this course (see also laboratory attendance policy below). The laboratory projects for this course are group projects that, for the most part, will be completed during class time. Thus, attendance is essential and required. Missed laboratory projects cannot be made up for any reason. Absence on lab day will result in a loss of 20% of the total points from that lab report.
• Respect for Others: Each member of the class has the right to express his or her ideas on an issue and has the responsibility to engage in discussion over any ideas put to the group. While discussions may become vigorous, you should take turns speaking, listen attentively while others speak, and avoid interrupting others. I will base your grades on papers and class contributions not on the conclusions you present, but on how these conclusions are reached and defended.
• Academic Accommodation: If you feel that you may need an accommodation based on the impact of a disability, you should discuss your needs with me soon as possible (no later than one week before an assignment is due). I rely on the Office of Academic Support in 104 Doane to verify the need for accommodation based on documentation on file in their office. No retroactive accommodations can be made.

Course Readings
(Additions to or changes in the readings may be made during the semester)

Barrett, S. (1999, December 2). Some notes on Robert W. Bradford and his Committee for Freedom of Choice in Medicine.
Behe, M. J. (1996). Darwin's black box: The biochemical challenge to evolution. New York: The Free Press.
Bem, D. J., & Honorton, C. (1994). Does Psi exist? Replicable evidence for an anomalous process of information transfer, Psychological Bulletin, 115, 4-18.
Beyerstein, B. L. (1999). Whence cometh the myth that we only use 10% of our brains? in S. Della Salla (ed). Mind myths: Exploring popular assumptions about the mind and brain (pp. 3-24). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Blackmore, S. (1992, Summer). Psychic experiences: Psychic illusions. Skeptical Inquirer, 159-165.
Blackmore, S. (1998, May/June). Abduction by aliens or sleep paralysis? Skeptical Inquirer, 23-28.
Bradford, C. (1998). Carole conquers cancer: One woman's odyssey. The Choice 24(2), 24-30.
Carr, J. J. (1992). The art of science: A practical guide to experiments, observations, and handling data (chapters 3 & 7). San Diego, CA: HighText Publications.
Chela-Flores, J. (1998, October). A search for extraterrestrial eukaryotes: Physical and paleontological aspects. Origins of Life and Evolution of the Biosphere, 28(4/6), 583-596.
Chudler, E. H. (1999). Do we use only 10% of our brain?
Collacott, E. A., Zimmerman, J. T., White, D. W., & Rindone, J. P. (2000, March 8). Bipolar permanent magnets for the treatment of chronic low back pain. Journal of the American Medical Association, 283(10), 1322-1325.
Committee for Freedom of Choice in Medicine, Inc. (2001, January).
Creation Research Society (2001). Statement of belief.
R Endler, J. A. (1986). Natural selection in the wild. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Emory Magazine. (2001, Summer). Rorschach Inkblot Test. Atlanta, GA: Emory University.
Ertel, S. (1992, Winter). Update on the "Mars effect." Skeptical Inquirer, 150-161. (read also responses to the article)
Falk, R.. (1998). On coincidences. In K. Frazier, (ed.), Encounters with the paranormal: Science, knowledge, and belief (pp. 43-56). Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
Feather, S. R., & Rhine, L. E. (1968). PK experiments with same and different targets. The Journal of Parapsychology, 33(3), 213-227
Fergusin, J. H. Dubinshy, M., & Kirsch, P. J. (1992, April 28). Court-ordered reimbursement for unproven medical technology. Journal of the American Medical Association, 269(16), 2116-2121.
Ferris, T. (2000). Interstellar spaceflight: Can we travel to other stars? In J. Gleick (Ed.), The best American science writing, 2000 (pp. 77-82). New York: Harper Collins.
French, C. C., Fowler, M., McCarthy, K., & Peers, D. (1991, Winter). Belief in astrology: A test of the Barnum effect. Skeptical Inquirer, 15, 166-172.
Friedman, E. I., Wierzchos, J., Ascaso, C., & Winkelhofer, M. (2001, February 27). Chains of magnetite crystals. Proceedings for the National Academy of Sciences, 98(5), 2176-2181.
Funder, D. C. (2001). The personality puzzle (pp. 2-7; 40-52). New York: W. W. Norton &Co.
Furnham, A. (1998, Fall). Write and wrong: The validity of graphological analysis. Skeptical Inquirer, 64-69.
Gardner, R. (1996). The truth about graphology. St. Paul, MN: Llewellyn Publications.
Gawande, A. (2000). The cancer-cluster myth. In D. Quammen (Ed.), The best American science and nature writing, 2000 (pp. 67-74). New York: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Gilovich, T. (1991). How we know what isnÕt so: The fallibility of human reasoning in everyday life. New York: The Free Press.
Goldfinger, S. E. (1999). By the way doctorÉI suffer from chronic leg pain.É Harvard Health Letter, 24(8), 8.
Gould, S. J. (1983). Evolution as fact and theory. In S. J. Gould (ed.), HenÕs teeth and horseÕs toes (pp. 253-262). New York: W. W. Norton & Co.
Hines, T. (1998a). The nature of pseudoscience. In T. Hines, Pseudoscience and the paranormal: A critical examination of the evidence (Chapter 1). Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
Hines, T. (1998b). Astrology, the lunar effect, and biorhythms. In T. Hines, Pseudoscience and the paranormal: A critical examination of the evidence (Chapter 6). Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
Honorton, C. (1993, June). Rhetoric over substance: The impoverished state of skepticism. Journal of Parapsychology, 57, 191-214.
Horn, C. J. (1997, March). Pollination: Evolutionist's dilemma. Institute for Creation Research Website:
Jukes, T. H. (1990, November 22). The testing of laetrile. Nature, 348, 279.
Kelly, I. W., Rotton, J., & Culver, J. (1985, Winter). The moon was full and nothing happened. Skeptical Inquirer, 129-133.
Kruger, J., Savitsky, K., & Gilovich, T. (1999, March/April). Superstition and the regression effect. Skeptical Inquirer, 23, 24-29.
Lafferty, M. (2001, July 1). Laetrile users swear substance is cancer cure. The Columbus Dispatch, A1-A2. Columbus, OH.
Lerner, I. J. (1987). Cancer quakery. Psychiatric Medicine, 5(4), 419-429.
Lilienfeld, S. (1999, Nov/Dec). New analyses raise doubts about replicability of ESP findings. Skeptical Inquirer.
Lett, J. (1990, Winter). A field guide to critical thinking. Skeptical Inquirer, 14, 31-39.
Loftus, E. (1997, September). Creating false memories. Scientific American, 71-75.
Lynn, S. J., Lock, T. G., Myers, B., & Payne, D. (1997). Recalling the unrecallable: Should hypnosis be used to recover memories in psychotherapy? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 6, 79-83.
Man, D., Man, B., & Plosker, H. (1999 December). The influence of permanent magnetic field therapy on wound healing in suction lipectomy patients: A double-blind study. Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, 104(7), 2261-2268.
Milton, J., & Wiseman, R. (1999a). Does Psi exist? Lack of replication of an anomalous process of information transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 387-391.
Milton, J., & Wiseman, R. (1999b). A meta-analysis of mass media tests of extrasensory perception. British Journal of Psychology, 90, 235-240.
Nash, M. (1987). What, if anything, is regressed about hypnotic age regression? Psychological Bulletin, 102, 42-52.
National Academy of Science (1999). Evidence supporting biological evolution. Science and Creationism Website.
National Cancer Institute (2001, June). Laetrile/Amygdalin (PDQ¨) page
National Public Radio (2001, August 28). Astrology school accreditied. (Need Real Player)
Neinhuys, J. W. (1997, November/December). The Mars effect in retrospect. Skeptical Inquirer, 24-29.
Newman, L. S., & Baumesiter, R. F. (1998). Abducted by aliens: Spurious memories of interplanetary masochism. In S. J. Lynn & K. M. McConkey (Eds.), Truth in memory (Chapter 11). New York: The Guilford Press.
Park, M. A. (1982, Winter). Palmistry: Science or hand jive? Skeptical Inquirer, 198-208.
Pigliucci, M. (2001). Design yes, intelligent no: A critique of Intelligent Design Theory and neocreationism. Skeptical Inquirer, 25, 34-39.
Piper, A. (1993). "Truth serum" and "recovered memories" of sexual abuse: A review of the evidence. The Journal of Psychiatry and Law, 21, 447-471.
Rhine, J. B. (1972). Parapsychology and man. The Journal of Parapsychology, 36 (2), 101-121.
Rhine, J. B. (1969). Psi-missing re-examined. The Journal of Parapsychology, 33 (1), 1-38.
Rissing, S. (1999). Intelligent design? Alas, human eyes donÕt have it. Columbus Dispatch.
Rowe, W. F. (1993, Winter). Psychic detectives: A critical examination. Skeptical Inquirer, 159-165.
Sagan, C. (1995a). The most precious thing. The demon-haunted world: Science as a candle in the dark (Chapter 1). New York: Random House.
Sagan, C. (1995b). The fine art of baloney detection. The demon-haunted world: Science as a candle in the dark (Chapter 12). New York: Random House.
Sanduleak, N. (1998). The moon is acquitted of murder in Cleveland. In K. Frazier, Encounters with the paranormal: Science, knowledge, and belief (Chapter 25). Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
Shermer, M. (1997). Why people believe weird things. (Chapter 7: Epidemics of accusations). New York: Freeman and Co.
Singer, B., & Benassi, V. A. (1998). Fooling some people all of the time. In K. Frazier, (ed.), Encounters with the paranormal: Science, knowledge, and belief (pp. 57-64). Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
Spanos, N. P. (1987). Past-life hypnotic regression: A critical view. Skeptical Inquirer, 78-84.
Spanos, N. P., Burgess, C. A., & Burgess, M. F. (1994). Past-life identities, UFO abductions, and Satanic Ritual Abuse: The social construction of memories. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 42, 433-446.
Stanovich, K. E. (1999). The fundamental computational bias. Who is rational? (Chapter 7). Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Stanovich, K. (1998). How to think straight about psychology (5th edition). New York: Harper/Collins.
Stewart, J. V. (1997). WhatÕs your sign? Astrology: WhatÕs really in the stars. Skeptic, 5, 68-72.
Trinkhaus, J. W., & Booke, A. L. (1982). Biorhythms: Another look. Psychological Reports, 50 (2), 396-398.
The UFO Chronicles. (No date).
Weiner, J. (1995). The beak of the finch (Chapters 1, 5, 6, 7). New York: Random House.
Wilson, B. (2000, September 9). The rise and fall of laetrile.
Yeoh, E. (1999). Astrology: More than just star-gazing.

Sample Topics for Final Project

ESP (anything not covered in class; e.g. psychic pets)
Dowsing
Power beads
Aromatherapy
Homeopathy
Subliminal Perception/Influence
Left Brain/Right Brain thinking
Therapeutic Touch
Thought Field Therapy
Color Therapy (Spectro-Chrome-Metry)
Fire Walking
Prophecies of Nostradamus
Plant growth facilitation by music.