Mind over matter? The cognitive styles of scientific scepticism and paranormal belief
Neil Dagnall, Andrew Denovan, Claire Murphy-Morgan, Kenneth Drinkwater, Danny Powell, Nick Neave
Frontiers in Psychology March 6, 2026 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1699045 via OpenAlex
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractPeople who hold strong scientific beliefs tend to rely on analytical-rational thinking, while those who hold paranormal beliefs tend to rely on intuitive-experiential thinking. In a sample of 300 adults, traditional and New Age paranormal beliefs correlated positively with intuitive processing and negatively with analytical processing; belief in science showed the opposite pattern. Two subgroups emerged: Higher Evidence-based Thinking (55% of participants) with high scientific and low paranormal belief, and Lower Evidence-based Thinking (45%) with low scientific and high paranormal belief. Cognitive rigidity (dogmatism and need for closure) did not differ between groups, suggesting these traits are belief-neutral characteristics of strongly held convictions rather than specific to scientific or paranormal worldviews.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Cross-sectional survey with latent profile analysis Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 300 |
| Population | Adults (mean age 45.95, SD 14.32) |
| Keywords | Paranormal Skepticism Cognition Cognitive style Parapsychology |
| Key finding | Scientific and paranormal beliefs represent oppositional worldviews associated with distinct, preferred modes of information processing: analytical-rational for scientific belief and intuitive-experiential for paranormal belief. |
Abstract
Scientific scepticism, as an epistemic orientation, remains under-researched. This study investigated the interplay between belief in science, supernatural credence, and cognitive processing styles in a sample of 300 participants ( M age = 45.95, SD = 14.32). Traditional (TPB) and New Age (NAP) paranormal beliefs correlated positively with intuitive-experiential measures and negatively with analytical-rational processing indices. Belief in Science showed the inverse pattern of relationships. Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) identified two distinct subgroups: Higher Evidence-based Thinking (HET; 55%), defined by high scientific and low paranormal belief, and Lower Evidence-based Thinking (LET; 45%), characterized by low scientific and high paranormal belief. HET (vs. LET) participants demonstrated significantly greater analytical-rational and lower intuitive-experiential processing. Cognitive rigidity (dogmatism and need for closure) did not differentiate between profiles, suggesting these are belief-neutral characteristics of strongly held convictions. Findings indicated that scientific and paranormal beliefs represent oppositional worldviews associated with distinct, preferred modes of information processing.