SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2020
The Persistence of Neuromyths in the Educational Settings: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
28 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploratory study of protective factors against belief in neuromyths in in-service teachers at Brazilian vocational-technical high school.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- From neuromyths to neuroscience literacy: a cross-domain study of brain misconceptions among educators in Chilean special schools.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- [Relationship between cerebral dominance and learning styles in Anesthesiology residents].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2026Observational
- Perceptions and interest in applied educational neuroscience: a diagnostic study of Brazilian teachers.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Educational neuromyths in higher education: beliefs about the brain and learning among university faculty members.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Mapping perceived training gaps in educational neuroscience among Brazilian teachers.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- International perspectives on gaps and solutions for integrating research evidence into classroom practices.NPJ science of learning · 2025Article
- Advances in complex thinking and neurotechnologies in education: a bibliometric analysis of research trends.Cognitive processing · 2025Review
- Why does the brain matter for education?The British journal of educational psychology · 2025Article
- Looking at Philosophy for Children and Its Outcomes Through a Neuroscience Lens.Basic and clinical neuroscience · 2025Review
- Neuroscience Literacy and Academic Outcomes: Insights from a University Student Population.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- The Effect of Correcting Neuromyths on Students' and Teachers' Later Reasoning.Journal of Intelligence · 2024Article
- Insights from the Active Use of Neuroscience Findings in Teaching and Learning.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- False Beliefs about Mathematics in Spanish Pre-Service Teachers and Relations with Math Anxiety.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2024Article
- Leveraging brain science for impactful advocacy and policymaking: The synergistic partnership between developmental cognitive neuroscientists and a parent-led grassroots movement to drive dyslexia prevention policy and legislation.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2024Review
- Neuroscience literacy in educators' training programs in Asia: A call to action.IBRO neuroscience reports · 2023Article
- Conceptions and Misconceptions: What Do School-Based Speech-Language Pathologists Think About Dyslexia?Language, speech, and hearing services in schools · 2023Article
- The Prevalence of Educational Neuromyths among Hungarian Pre-Service Teachers.Journal of Intelligence · 2023Article
- Neuromyths and knowledge about intellectual giftedness in a highly educated multilingual country.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Prevalence of neuromyths among psychology students: small differences to pre-service teachers.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neuroscience influences education, and these two areas have converged in a new field denominated "Neuroeducation." However, the growing interest in the education-brain relationship does not match the proper use of research findings. In 2007, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) warned of the misunderstandings about the brain among teachers, labeling them as neuromyths. The main objective here is to observe the prevalence of the neuromyths in educators over time. After two decades of publications of research on neuromyths among in-service or prospective teachers, this work presents a systematic scientific review. To select the articles, we used the words: "teachers," "preservice teachers," "neuromyths" combined with the Boolean data type "and." The search was filtered according to the following criteria: (a) identifiable author, (b) written in English, Spanish, French, Italian, or Portuguese, (c) word neuromyth in title, abstract, or keywords, (d) research with a participant's survey, (e) sample focused on educators, (f) peer-review publication index in JCR, SJR, or ESCI. The documents were found through Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, Dialnet, ProQuest, EBSCO-host, and Google Scholar. After the search, 24 articles were identified as being of sufficiently high quality for this systematic review. This result highlights that neuromyths are still the subject of attention almost two decades after their definition. The findings present neuromyths as the consequence of a lack of scientific knowledge, a communicative gap between scientists and teachers, and the low-quality information sources consulted by teachers. In addition, the data on protectors and predictors of neuromyths is inconsistent. There is also no standard scientific methodology nor a guideline to determine a new neuromyth. The results show the need to improve the scientific content in higher education and the importance of in-service teacher training. This research justifies the requirement for university professors to be active researchers and to establish a close link with educators from other fields and levels. Neuroeducation will be the bridge that unites scientific knowledge and practical application in education, with a rigorous, standard method for the entire scientific-educational community.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.