Sep 15, 2025 09:17 PM
https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1097554
INTRO: Early scientific theories—such as those explaining basic phenomena like gravity, burning, and the movement of molecules in water—centered on presumed inherent properties rather than external factors, thereby misleading famous philosophers and scientists, from Aristotle to Scottish botanist Robert Brown, in their theorizing.
A new study by a team of psychology researchers has now found that this tendency is in fact common in the history of science. Moreover, through a series of experiments and surveys, the paper’s authors conclude these misfires were likely driven by cognitive constraints, among scientists and non-scientists alike, that have acted as a bottleneck to discovery and shaped the trajectory of scientific theories over millennia.
The study, which appears in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, was conducted by researchers at the University of Edinburgh and New York University.
“Early scientific theories across multiple fields share a common pattern, in that they focus too much on built‑in features and too little on interactions with surroundings,” explains Zachary Horne, a lecturer in psychology at the University of Edinburgh and the paper’s lead author. “This bias appears throughout the history of science, and its ‘fingerprints’ can even be seen among scientists today.”
Horne and the paper’s other authors, Andrei Cimpian, a professor of psychology at NYU, and Mert Kobas, an NYU doctoral student, point to early theories of gravity as evidence of this systematic “inherence bias” in scientists’ initial attempts to explain a phenomenon... (MORE - details, no ads)
INTRO: Early scientific theories—such as those explaining basic phenomena like gravity, burning, and the movement of molecules in water—centered on presumed inherent properties rather than external factors, thereby misleading famous philosophers and scientists, from Aristotle to Scottish botanist Robert Brown, in their theorizing.
A new study by a team of psychology researchers has now found that this tendency is in fact common in the history of science. Moreover, through a series of experiments and surveys, the paper’s authors conclude these misfires were likely driven by cognitive constraints, among scientists and non-scientists alike, that have acted as a bottleneck to discovery and shaped the trajectory of scientific theories over millennia.
The study, which appears in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, was conducted by researchers at the University of Edinburgh and New York University.
“Early scientific theories across multiple fields share a common pattern, in that they focus too much on built‑in features and too little on interactions with surroundings,” explains Zachary Horne, a lecturer in psychology at the University of Edinburgh and the paper’s lead author. “This bias appears throughout the history of science, and its ‘fingerprints’ can even be seen among scientists today.”
Horne and the paper’s other authors, Andrei Cimpian, a professor of psychology at NYU, and Mert Kobas, an NYU doctoral student, point to early theories of gravity as evidence of this systematic “inherence bias” in scientists’ initial attempts to explain a phenomenon... (MORE - details, no ads)