Current Psychology

, Volume 37, Issue 3, pp 574–582 | Cite as

Education or Indoctrination? The Accuracy of Introductory Psychology Textbooks in Covering Controversial Topics and Urban Legends About Psychology

  • Christopher J. FergusonEmail author
  • Jeffrey M. Brown
  • Amanda V. Torres


The introductory psychology class represents the first opportunity for the field to present new students with a comprehensive overview of psychological research. Writing introductory psychology textbooks is challenging given that authors need to cover many areas they themselves may not be intimately familiar with. This challenge is compounded by problems within the scholarly community in which controversial topics may be communicated in ideological terms within scholarly discourse. Psychological science has historically seen concerns raised about the mismatch between claims and data made about certain fields of knowledge, apprehensions that continue in the present “replication crisis.” The concern is that, although acting in good faith, introductory psychology textbook authors may unwittingly communicate information to readers that is factually untrue. Twenty-four leading introductory psychology textbooks were surveyed for their coverage of a number of controversial topics (e.g., media violence, narcissism epidemic, multiple intelligences) and scientific urban legends (e.g., Kitty Genovese, Mozart Effect) for their factual accuracy. Results indicated numerous errors of factual reporting across textbooks, particularly related to failing to inform students of the controversial nature of some research fields and repeating some scientific urban legends as if true. Recommendations are made for improving the accuracy of introductory textbooks.


Textbooks Teaching of psychology Education Introductory psychology 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

This manuscript did not involve human participants research. All research was designed to comport with ethical standards for social research.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to declare.


  1. Australian Government, Attorney General’s Department. (2010). Literature Review on the Impact of Playing Violent Video Games on Aggression. Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
  2. Brock, T. C. (2008). Negligible scholarly impact of 38-witnesses parable. American Psychologist, 63(6), 561–562. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.63.6.561.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Confer, J. C., Easton, J. A., Fleischman, D. S., Goetz, C. D., Lewis, D. G., Perilloux, C., & Buss, D. M. (2010). Evolutionary psychology: Controversies, questions, prospects, and limitations. American Psychologist, 65(2), 110–126. doi: 10.1037/a0018413.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Donnellan, M., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Robins, R. W. (2009). An emerging epidemic of narcissism or much ado about nothing? Journal of Research in Personality, 43(3), 498–501. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2008.12.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fanelli, D. (2010). ‘Positive’ results increase down the hierarchy of the sciences. PLoS ONE, 5(4), e10068.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Farady, M. (2010). The girl-crisis movement: Evaluating the foundation. Review of General Psychology, 14(1), 44–55. doi: 10.1037/a0019024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ferguson, C. J. (2010). Blazing Angels or Resident Evil? Can violent video games be a force for good? Review of General Psychology, 14(2), 68–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gardner, H., & Moran, S. (2006). The science of Multiple Intelligences Theory: A response to Lynn Waterhouse. Educational Psychologist, 41(4), 227–232. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4104_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gershoff, E. (2002). Corporal punishment by parents and associated child behaviors and experiences: A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), 539–579. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.128.4.539.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Gray, P. (2013). Why Zimbardo’s Prison Experiment Isn’t in My Textbook. Psychology Today.Retrieved from: Accessed 13 December 2016.Google Scholar
  11. Grimes, T., Anderson, J., & Bergen, L. (2008). Media violence and aggression: Science and ideology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Hall, R., Day, T., & Hall, R. (2011). A plea for caution: violent video games, the supreme court, and the role of science. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 86(4), 315–321.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Halpern, D. F. (2010). Undergraduate education in psychology: A blueprint for the future of the discipline. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi: 10.1037/12063-000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Haselhuhn, C. W., & Clopton, K. L. (2008). The representation of applied psychology areas in introductory psychology textbooks. Teaching of Psychology, 35(3), 205–209. doi: 10.1080/00986280802189130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hedges, L. V. (1987). How hard is hard science, how soft is soft science? The empirical cumulativeness of research. American Psychologist, 42(5), 443–455. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.42.5.443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Inbar, Y., & Lammers, J. (2012). Political diversity in social and personality psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(5), 496–503. doi: 10.1177/1745691612448792.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Ioannidis, J. (2008). Effectiveness of antidepressants: An evidence myth constructed from a thousand randomized trials? Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, 3, 1–9. Retrieved 1/20/13 from:
  18. Jarrett, T. (2008). Foundations of sand? The Psychologist. Retrieved from:
  19. Jensen, R., & Burgess, H. (1997). Mythmaking: How introductory psychology texts present B. F. Skinner’s analysis of cognition. The Psychological Record, 47(2), 221–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Larzelere, R. (2008). Disciplinary spanking: The scientific evidence. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 29(4), 334–335. doi: 10.1097/DBP.0b013e3181829f30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. LeBel, E. P., & Peters, K. R. (2011). Fearing the future of empirical psychology: Bem’s (2011) evidence of psi as a case study of deficiencies in modal research practice. Review of General Psychology, 15(4), 371–379. doi: 10.1037/a0025172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lifton, R. J. (1961). Thought reform and the psychology of totalism: A study of “brainwashing” in China. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  23. Lilienfeld, S. O. (2004). Defining Psychology: Is it worth the trouble? Journal Of Clinical Psychology, 60(12), 1249–1253. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20067.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Lilienfeld, S. O. (2012a). Public skepticism of psychology: Why many people perceive the study of human behavior as unscientific. American Psychologist, 67(2), 111–129. doi: 10.1037/a0023963.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Lilienfeld, S. O. (2012b). Further sources of our field’s embattled public reputation. American Psychologist, 67(9), 808–809. doi: 10.1037/a0031015.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Lilienfeld, S. O., Lynn, S., Ruscio, J., & Beyerstein, B. L. (2009a). 50 great myths of popular psychology: Shattering widespread misconceptions about human behavior. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  27. Lilienfeld, S., Lynn, S., Ruscio, J., & Beyerstein, B. (2009b). Myth busting in introductory psychology courses: The whys and the hows. Essays in Excellence in Teaching, 9, 55–61. Retrieved 2/6/12 from: Scholar
  28. Lilienfeld, S. O., Lynn, S. J., Namy, L. L., & Woolf, N. (2012). Psychology: From inquiry to understanding (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.Google Scholar
  29. Macmillan, M. (2008). Phineas Gage: Unraveling the myth. The Psychologist, 21, 828-831.Google Scholar
  30. Manning, R., Levine, M., & Collins, A. (2007). The Kitty Genovese murder and the social psychology of helping: The parable of the 38 witnesses. American Psychologist, 62(6), 555–562. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.62.6.555.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Manning, R., Levine, M., & Collins, A. (2008). The legacy of the 38 witnesses and the importance of getting history right. American Psychologist, 63(6), 562–563. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.63.6.562.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Matlin, M. W. (2004). Pollyanna Principle. In R. Pohl (Ed.), Cognitive illusions: Handbook on falicies and biases in thinking, judgment, and memory (pp. 255–272). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  33. Morris, S. Z., & Gibson, C. L. (2011). Corporal punishment’s influence on children’s aggressive and delinquent behavior. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38(8), 818–839. doi: 10.1177/0093854811406070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nature. (2005). In praise of soft science. Nature, 435(7045), 1003.Google Scholar
  35. Pashler, H., & Harris, C. (2012). Is the replicability crisis overblown? Three arguments examined. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 531–36. doi: 10.1177/1745691612463401.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Redding, R. E. (2001). Sociopolitical diversity in psychology: The case for pluralism. American Psychologist, 56(3), 205–215. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.205.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(1), 4–28. doi: 10.1006/jesp.1998.1373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Steuer, F., & Ham, K. (2008). Psychology textbooks: Examining their accuracy. Teaching of Psychology, 35, 160–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stoet, G., & Geary, D. C. (2012). Can stereotype threat explain the gender gap in mathematics performance and achievement? Review of General Psychology, 16(1), 93–102. doi: 10.1037/a0026617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tavris, C. (2014). Teaching contentious classics. APS Observer. Retrieved from:
  41. Teo, T. (2012). Psychology is still a problematic science and the public knows it. American Psychologist, 67(9), 807–808. doi: 10.1037/a0030084.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Tetlock, P. E. (2012). Rational versus irrational prejudices: How problematic is the ideological lopsidedness of social psychology? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(5), 519–521. doi: 10.1177/1745691612454305.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Thomas, R. (2001). Reoccurring errors among recent history of psychology textbooks. American Journal of Psychology, 120(3), 477–495.Google Scholar
  44. Twenge, J. M., & Foster, J. D. (2008). Mapping the scale of the narcissism epidemic: Increases in narcissism 2002–2007 within ethnic groups. Journal of Research in Personality, 42(6), 1619–1622. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2008.06.014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Waterhouse, L. (2006). Multiple intelligences, the Mozart effect, and emotional intelligence: A critical review. Educational Psychologist, 41(4), 207–225. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4104_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher J. Ferguson
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jeffrey M. Brown
    • 2
  • Amanda V. Torres
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyStetson UniversityDeLandUSA
  2. 2.Texas A&M International UniversityLaredoUSA

Personalised recommendations