What is *50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology* about?

*50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology* debunks widely held misconceptions about human behavior, such as the belief that people only use 10% of their brain or that opposites attract. Using empirical evidence, the authors dissect 50 myths across topics like memory, intelligence, and emotions, replacing pseudoscience with scientifically validated insights to promote critical thinking.

Who should read *50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology*?

This book is ideal for psychology students, educators, and general readers seeking to distinguish scientific facts from pop culture myths. It’s particularly valuable for critical thinkers interested in understanding human behavior, debunking misinformation, or improving their ability to evaluate psychological claims.

Is *50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology* worth reading?

Yes, the book offers a compelling mix of myth-busting and practical insights, making it a standout resource for understanding psychology. Its evidence-based approach, accessible style, and inclusion of over 250 additional myths for exploration ensure lasting relevance for both academic and casual readers.

What are the most common myths debunked in *50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology*?

Key myths include the 10% brain usage claim, left-brain/right-brain personality stereotypes, and the idea that handwriting reveals personality traits. Others address mental health misconceptions, such as the validity of repressed memories and the effectiveness of hypnosis for memory retrieval.

How credible are the authors of *50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology*?

Scott Lilienfeld (Emory University professor) and co-authors are renowned for their expertise in clinical psychology and skepticism of pseudoscience. Lilienfeld’s work on psychiatric classification and evidence-based practices, along with awards like the David Shakow Early Career Award, underscores their authority.

Does *50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology* critique pop neuroscience?

Yes, the authors challenge oversimplified neuromyths, such as neuroimaging claims about detecting moral centers in the brain. They argue for a nuanced view of neuroscience’s role, emphasizing that not all psychological questions require neural-level explanations.

What is the “Mythbusting Kit” in *50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology*?

The kit provides tools to evaluate psychological claims, emphasizing skepticism of anecdotal evidence, reliance on peer-reviewed research, and awareness of confirmation bias. It encourages readers to question sources and distinguish correlation from causation.

How does *50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology* address the MMR vaccine controversy?

The book cites large-scale studies disproving links between the MMR vaccine and autism, critiquing fad treatments like facilitated communication. It highlights the dangers of pseudoscientific claims in public health.

심리학의 오해 50가지

인간 행동에 관한 널리 퍼진 오해 타파하기

스콧 릴리언펠드

3.66(4791 Reviews)

심리학의 오해 50가지 개요

당신이 항상 믿어왔던 심리학적 미신들을 파헤칩니다. "대중 심리학의 50가지 대단한 미신들(50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology)"은 학술적 사고를 변화시킨 증거 기반의 명확성으로 오해들을 산산조각 냅니다. 당신의 뇌를 단 10%만 사용한다고 생각하시나요? 코넬 대학교의 토마스 길로비치(Thomas Gilovich)는 이 미신 타파서를 심리학적 사실과 허구를 구분하기 위한 "놀라운 자원"이라고 부릅니다.

전달 방식을 선택하세요

한 권의 책, 다양한 듣기 방식.

심리학의 오해 50가지의 같은 아이디어를 담았습니다. 나에게 맞는 목소리, 깊이, 속도를 고르고 언제든 바꿔 보세요.

1장

The Psychology of Misconception: Why We Believe What Isn't True

Have you ever wondered why so many people believe we only use 10% of our brains? Or why the myth that opposites attract persists despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary? Scott O. Lilienfeld's groundbreaking work "50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology" tackles these questions and more, exposing the scientific reality behind our most cherished psychological misconceptions. Since its publication, this myth-busting masterpiece has become required reading in psychology departments worldwide and has been translated into over 15 languages. Celebrities like Emma Watson and Bill Gates have praised its accessible approach to complex topics, with Gates noting it "changed how I think about thinking itself." The book's cultural impact extends beyond academia-it has inspired a popular TED Talk series and was the basis for National Geographic's "Brain Games" television show. What makes this work so compelling isn't just its debunking of myths, but its exploration of why we're so susceptible to psychological misconceptions in the first place.

2장

The Myth-Making Mind: How Psychological Misconceptions Take Root

Psychology permeates every aspect of modern life-from self-help books to media portrayals of mental illness to everyday conversations about what makes people tick. Yet much of what we believe about psychology isn't supported by scientific evidence. These aren't just harmless misconceptions; they can lead to poor life decisions with real consequences. People who believe we repress painful memories might waste time searching for nonexistent childhood traumas. Those convinced that happiness depends primarily on external circumstances may look outside rather than inside themselves for fulfillment. Why do psychological myths persist so stubbornly? The answer lies in ten primary sources of error that make us vulnerable to false beliefs. Word-of-mouth transmission allows catchy but incorrect ideas like "opposites attract" to spread across generations. Our desire for easy answers and quick fixes makes us susceptible to claims about speed reading or rapid weight loss, despite evidence showing most shortcuts don't work. We're also victims of selective perception and memory-we notice and remember "hits" (when two things co-occur) while ignoring "misses" (when they don't), creating illusory correlations like the nonexistent link between full moons and strange behavior. Another common error is inferring causation from correlation. When variables A and B are statistically related, there are three possibilities: A causes B, B causes A, or a third variable C causes both. We typically jump to the first conclusion while ignoring the others. Similarly, post hoc reasoning leads us to assume that because A precedes B, A must cause B-like believing herbal remedies cure depression because symptoms improved afterward, ignoring natural recovery or placebo effects. Exposure to biased samples creates distorted impressions. Television portrays about 75% of severely mentally ill individuals as violent, though actual violence rates are much lower. We also reason by representativeness, assuming that things that look similar must be meaningfully related-like graphologists claiming widely-spaced handwriting indicates a need for interpersonal distance. Media portrayals frequently exaggerate psychological phenomena for dramatic effect, while many myths contain kernels of truth that have been greatly overstated. Finally, terminological confusion leads to misunderstandings-like believing schizophrenia involves multiple personalities because the term means "split mind." Understanding these sources of error is our best defense against psychological myths. As Stephen Jay Gould advised, we should be most skeptical of the stories we think we know best.

들리는 모든 단어를 눈으로 확인하세요

심리학의 오해 50가지의 각 단어가 오디오에 맞춰 실시간으로 강조되어 편하게 따라 읽을 수 있습니다.

3장

Brain Myths: The Neuroscience Behind Our Misconceptions

Perhaps no organ generates more myths than the human brain. The persistent belief that we use only 10% of our brain power remains widespread even among educated people, with surveys showing a third of psychology majors believe it. This myth thrives because it offers hope-if we could tap into that unused 90%, we might achieve remarkable self-improvement. Marketers and self-help gurus exploit this hope, promising shortcuts to success through "brain unlocking" techniques, meditation programs, and various supplements claiming to activate dormant neural potential. The reality? This myth contradicts several fundamental neurological facts. Evolution wouldn't waste resources on an underutilized organ that consumes 20% of our oxygen despite being only 2-3% of body weight. Brain scans reveal constant activity across all regions, even during sleep. Losing even small portions of brain tissue to injury causes significant impairments, from memory loss to personality changes. Modern brain imaging techniques like fMRI and PET scans show no "silent areas"- even simple tasks like finger tapping or basic arithmetic activate widespread brain regions, demonstrating the brain's interconnected nature. Another persistent misconception is that people are either "left-brained" or "right-brained." While there's genuine scientific evidence that the brain's hemispheres differ in function, these differences are relative, not absolute. The left hemisphere excels at specific aspects of language like grammar and vocabulary, while the right handles speech intonation, emotional context, and spatial relationships better. Studies of split-brain patients reveal that both hemispheres possess remarkable capabilities and participate in most cognitive tasks, with one simply being more efficient for certain functions. Pop psychology has greatly exaggerated these hemispheric differences, creating a "dichotomania" that portrays the left brain as "logical," "analytical," and "masculine" and the right as "holistic," "intuitive," "creative," and "feminine." This oversimplification has spawned numerous dubious educational programs claiming to "train" or "synchronize" the hemispheres. Some schools even attempt to categorize students as left or right-brained learners, despite no scientific evidence supporting such distinctions. Modern neuroscience emphasizes that optimal brain functioning requires integrated rather than synchronized hemispheric activity, with constant communication between both sides through the corpus callosum. Even our understanding of visual perception contains deeply rooted myths. Surprisingly large proportions of adults believe our visual perceptions involve tiny emissions from our eyes, similar to headlight beams. When shown diagrams depicting vision, 41-67% of college students select images showing rays emanating from the eye rather than light entering it. This "extramission theory" dates back to Plato and persists despite centuries of scientific evidence to the contrary. The misconception has historical roots in ancient Greek philosophy and medieval theories of vision. Even beliefs about the "evil eye" inflicting harm have been widespread across many cultures, appearing in biblical texts, ancient Egyptian practices, and modern Mediterranean societies. These persistent myths demonstrate how intuitive but incorrect ideas about brain function can resist scientific evidence and persist across generations.

4장

The Psychology of Perception: Seeing Isn't Always Believing

Our perceptions of reality are often less accurate than we assume, shaped by cognitive biases, expectations, and cultural beliefs. This gap between perception and reality manifests in several key areas that challenge our understanding of how we process information and experience the world around us. Take subliminal persuasion-the idea that messages presented below conscious awareness can powerfully influence our behavior. Despite widespread belief in its effectiveness (83% of psychology undergraduates believe it works), the reality is more nuanced and complex. The concept gained popularity in the 1950s when market researcher James Vicary claimed he could boost concession sales by flashing messages during movies, though he later admitted to fabricating his results. Under controlled laboratory conditions, researchers can demonstrate modest, short-lived subliminal effects. In priming experiments, briefly flashed words or images that observers don't consciously perceive can influence subsequent responses. For example, showing participants a happy face for milliseconds can temporarily improve their mood, or flashing the word "thirst" might increase their desire for water. However, the subliminal self-help industry vastly exaggerates these effects, claiming the brain understands complex messages presented at extremely weak levels and that these stimuli are especially effective because they bypass conscious awareness-a view rooted in outdated Freudian concepts most scientific psychologists have abandoned. Another perceptual myth involves extrasensory perception (ESP). Belief in ESP is remarkably widespread-41% of Americans believe in it, with 73% of psychology students considering it well-documented. This belief persists despite weak scientific evidence, fueled by media portrayals in shows like "Medium" and "The X-Files." Our tendency to believe in ESP stems partly from underestimating how common coincidences actually are and our brain's natural pattern-seeking behavior. When you dream about a long-lost friend who calls the next day, it seems extraordinary, but such coincidences are statistically more probable than we intuitively realize. We tend to remember hits and forget misses, creating an illusion of paranormal connection. Even seemingly straightforward perceptions like memory are subject to misconceptions. Many people believe memories work like video recordings, faithfully preserving experiences exactly as they happened. In reality, memory is reconstructive-we piece together fragments, filling in gaps with assumptions and expectations. This makes eyewitness testimony far less reliable than juries typically believe, with confident witnesses often being just as likely to be wrong as those expressing doubt. Studies have shown that post-event information can dramatically alter how people remember incidents, and false memories can be implanted through suggestion. For instance, researchers have successfully convinced participants they met Bugs Bunny at Disneyland (an impossible memory since Bugs Bunny is a Warner Bros. character). These perceptual myths remind us that seeing isn't always believing-and sometimes, believing affects what we see. Our perceptions are filtered through layers of expectation, prior experience, and cultural conditioning, making objective reality more elusive than we might think. Understanding these limitations can help us become more critical consumers of information and more aware of our own perceptual biases.

심리학의 오해 50가지에서 더 많은 것을 얻으세요

매일 새로운 인사이트를 10만 개 이상의 레슨에서 만나보세요
단어가 강조되어 오디오와 실시간으로 동기화됩니다
내 라이브러리를 저장하고 모든 기기에서 이용하세요

5장

Development Across the Lifespan: From Mozart Effect to Midlife Crisis

Popular psychology is filled with myths about human development from infancy to old age. One persistent belief is that playing Mozart to infants enhances their intelligence-the so-called "Mozart Effect." This claim originated from a 1993 study showing college students performed better on spatial reasoning tasks after listening to Mozart. The media transformed this modest, temporary effect into claims that Mozart makes babies smarter, spawning an industry of "brain-enhancing" products for infants. Subsequent research has thoroughly debunked these claims, showing no lasting cognitive benefits from exposing infants to classical music. The belief that adolescence is universally a time of "storm and stress" dates back to G. Stanley Hall in 1904 and was later reinforced by Anna Freud, who claimed "to be normal during the adolescent period is by itself abnormal." Research does show American adolescents experience somewhat elevated risks in three domains: conflicts with parents, mood instability, and risky behavior. However, studies consistently demonstrate that only about 20% of teens experience pronounced turmoil, with the substantial majority enjoying positive moods and harmonious relationships. Cross-cultural data further contradicts the universality of teen angst-in many non-Western societies, adolescence typically passes without significant distress. Similarly, the notion that most people experience a midlife crisis in their 40s or early 50s has little scientific support. While many adults face challenges during midlife, research shows no evidence of a universal crisis period. Most middle-aged adults report high levels of life satisfaction, with only about 10% experiencing anything resembling a "crisis." The myth persists partly because midlife coincides with various life transitions that affect some individuals profoundly, and because media portrayals exaggerate these experiences. Perhaps most pernicious is the myth that old age brings inevitable decline in happiness and mental function. Popular culture portrays the elderly as cranky, depressed, forgetful, and senile-stereotypes that begin with children's media (42% of elderly Disney characters are portrayed negatively). Research thoroughly debunks these myths. Surveys show happiness actually increases with age through the late 60s and 70s, with men over 65 being the happiest demographic group. While cognitive processing speed does decline with age, wisdom and emotional regulation often improve, and most seniors maintain active, engaged lives.

6장

The Social Animal: Myths About Human Connection

Some of our most cherished beliefs about social relationships turn out to be myths. Despite the Hollywood trope of mismatched couples falling in love, research overwhelmingly shows that similarity, not difference, predicts attraction. Studies demonstrate that people with similar personality traits, attitudes, and values are more likely to be attracted to each other and to have stable, satisfying relationships. The myth of opposites attracting persists because it makes for compelling stories and because small differences can add interest to relationships, but the evidence is clear: homophily (attraction to similar others), not complementarity, is the rule in romantic relationships. Another social myth concerns gender communication. Despite bestselling books like John Gray's "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus" series claiming men and women communicate in fundamentally different ways, research reveals these differences are minimal. Meta-analyses show only small differences: women aren't significantly more talkative, with studies showing both genders speak about 16,000 words daily; women are only slightly more self-disclosing; men interrupt only slightly more often; and women are somewhat better at reading nonverbal cues. As researcher Kathryn Dindia puts it, "men are from North Dakota, women are from South Dakota"-far more alike than different in communication styles. Perhaps the most dangerous social myth is "there's safety in numbers"-the belief that the presence of many bystanders increases the likelihood of receiving help in an emergency. Research shows the opposite is true. The presence of many bystanders actually reduces the likelihood of receiving help through two psychological processes: pluralistic ignorance (where people look to others to determine if a situation is truly an emergency) and diffusion of responsibility (where the presence of others dilutes each person's sense of individual responsibility). Studies consistently show people are more likely to help when alone than in groups. Another harmful social myth is that expressing anger directly is healthier than holding it in. The popular belief that venting anger is beneficial permeates our culture, from Aristotle's concept of catharsis to Freud's pressure cooker analogy of repressed emotions. Despite its popularity, research consistently shows the catharsis hypothesis is false. For over 40 years, studies have demonstrated that expressing anger directly toward others or objects actually increases aggression. People who pounded nails after being insulted became more critical of their insulters, and playing aggressive sports or violent video games increases rather than decreases aggressive tendencies.

들리는 모든 단어를 눈으로 확인하세요

심리학의 오해 50가지의 각 단어가 오디오에 맞춰 실시간으로 강조되어 편하게 따라 읽을 수 있습니다.

7장

Mental Health Misconceptions: From Diagnosis to Treatment

Some of the most harmful psychological myths concern mental health. The belief that psychiatric labels inherently stigmatize patients is widespread but misguided. Well-controlled studies that separate the effects of psychiatric diagnoses from aberrant behaviors consistently show that stigma stems primarily from behaviors rather than labels. The stigma of mental illness predates all psychiatric classification systems, and diagnoses themselves are confidential unless shared. Psychiatric labels actually serve essential functions in treatment coordination, research, and insurance coverage, and can even have positive effects by providing explanations for otherwise puzzling behaviors. Another persistent misconception is that schizophrenia involves multiple personalities. This confusion is widespread-77% of psychology students in one survey endorsed this misconception. The misunderstanding stems partly from terminology-Swiss psychiatrist Eugen Bleuler coined "schizophrenia" meaning "split mind" in 1911, referring not to multiple personalities but to a "splitting" within psychological functions. People with schizophrenia don't have multiple personalities but rather a single personality that's been shattered, involving disrupted reality perception, confused thinking, unpredictable moods, delusions, and hallucinations. Perhaps most harmful is the myth that most mentally ill people are violent. Popular media has created a powerful but false association between mental illness and violence, with about 75% of films featuring characters with serious mental illness portraying them as physically aggressive or homicidal. Research evidence contradicts these beliefs. Studies show that while there is a modestly heightened risk of violence among people with severe mental illnesses like schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, this elevated risk appears limited to a small subset-primarily those with paranoid delusions and substance abuse disorders. Patients who take medication regularly show no higher risk for violence than the general population. Treatment approaches are also subject to myths. The notion that alcoholics must completely abstain from alcohol is deeply embedded in our culture, with only 29% of the public believing recovered alcoholics can drink moderately. This belief stems from the disease model of alcoholism, popularized by Alcoholics Anonymous. However, the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism found that 17.7% of former alcoholics could drink moderately without problems, challenging the "once an alcoholic, always an alcoholic" dogma. The evidence suggests that treatment should be tailored to individual needs, with abstinence appropriate for those with severe dependence but controlled drinking a viable option for others.

8장

The Truth About Psychological Testing and Assessment

Psychological testing is surrounded by numerous myths and misconceptions that persist in both professional and public spheres. Many people believe intelligence (IQ) tests are inherently biased against certain groups, particularly minorities and women, simply because these groups may score differently on average. However, after decades of rigorous research and analysis, experts now agree that group differences in test scores don't necessarily indicate bias. The key question is whether the tests accurately predict performance across different groups in real-world settings. Multiple expert panels, including the American Psychological Association's Task Force on Intelligence, have concluded there's no evidence that IQ tests underpredict the performance of women or minorities. In fact, IQ tests consistently provide valid, cost-effective predictors of academic achievement and job performance across nearly all occupations studied, from entry-level positions to complex professional roles. The Rorschach Inkblot Test represents another controversial area in psychological assessment. Despite its cultural prominence and widespread clinical use (with approximately 6 million tests administered yearly worldwide), the Rorschach has faced serious scientific scrutiny. Research indicates most Rorschach scores bear little relationship to specific personality traits, and the test fails to reliably detect common mental health conditions like depression, anxiety disorders, or antisocial personality disorder. The test performs adequately only for detecting thought disorders like schizophrenia, where bizarre responses genuinely reflect disordered thinking patterns. Concerning studies show the Rorschach often pathologizes normal individuals, with one comprehensive study finding that 1 in 6 normal participants scored in the pathological range on the Schizophrenia Index. This false-positive rate raises serious concerns about its diagnostic accuracy. Graphology-the analysis of handwriting to determine personality traits-presents perhaps the most striking example of a widely used but scientifically invalid assessment method. Despite attracting thousands of followers and being used in hiring decisions in some European countries, scientific research thoroughly debunks graphology's claims. Well-controlled studies consistently show graphologists perform no better than chance at predicting job performance or personality traits. Multiple meta-analyses have found correlation coefficients hovering near zero for most predicted outcomes. Graphology's perceived accuracy stems from two psychological phenomena: the representativeness heuristic (linking physical characteristics like upward-slanting writing with personality traits like optimism) and the P.T. Barnum Effect (finding personal meaning in vague, generally applicable statements). Test-taking strategies also harbor persistent myths that can impact performance. Contrary to widespread belief, changing answers on multiple-choice tests typically improves rather than harms scores. Studies show between 68% and 100% of college students believe sticking with their original answers is best, yet over 60 empirical studies consistently demonstrate that students who change answers are more likely to change from wrong to right than from right to wrong-typically gaining 2-3 points for every point lost. Analysis of actual test-taking behavior reveals that students who engage in thoughtful answer revision tend to receive higher test scores overall. This "first instinct fallacy" persists largely due to the greater emotional impact of remembering the few times changing from right to wrong occurred, compared to the more numerous but less memorable instances of beneficial changes.

심리학의 오해 50가지에서 더 많은 것을 얻으세요

매일 새로운 인사이트를 10만 개 이상의 레슨에서 만나보세요
단어가 강조되어 오디오와 실시간으로 동기화됩니다
내 라이브러리를 저장하고 모든 기기에서 이용하세요

9장

Science vs. Intuition: The Battle for Psychological Truth

Despite the prevalence of psychological myths, scientific research offers a path to more accurate understanding. As Carl Sagan noted, genuine science is often the best antidote to pseudoscience, with scientific fact frequently being stranger and more fascinating than fiction. Understanding real psychological knowledge can help people resist the seductive influence of psychological myths while still fulfilling our need for wonder-with the advantage of being true. The contrast between scientific and intuitive approaches to psychology is stark. Many believe psychology is "just common sense," with authorities like radio host Dennis Prager claiming valid studies never contradict common sense. Yet as Voltaire noted, "Common sense is not so common." Science, including psychological science, is actually uncommon sense-requiring us to set aside intuitions when evaluating evidence. This is particularly evident in clinical decision-making. Despite widespread belief in expert intuition, mechanical decision-making methods consistently outperform clinical judgment. Paul Meehl's groundbreaking work demonstrated that statistical equations and actuarial tables yield predictions that are at least as accurate as-and often more accurate than-those made by experts using clinical judgment alone. This finding holds across diverse domains including psychiatric diagnosis, predicting therapy outcomes, suicide risk, college performance, criminal behavior, and medical diagnoses. The superiority of mechanical methods stems from several factors: they draw from larger, more representative samples; they're perfectly consistent; and they're immune to the cognitive biases that plague human judgment. Many clinicians resist these findings, fearing replacement by computers or believing that probability doesn't apply to unique individuals. These objections are unfounded. Mental health professionals remain essential for collecting appropriate data and providing services, but they'd serve patients better by incorporating mechanical decision aids rather than relying solely on judgment and intuition. The battle between science and intuition extends to popular treatments as well. Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is widely misunderstood as a brutal procedure where unwilling patients are strapped down and shocked into violent convulsions. In reality, modern ECT involves general anesthesia, muscle relaxants, and carefully controlled electrical stimulation, with the patient unconscious during the brief procedure. Controlled research shows it's effective for severe depression when other treatments have failed, and studies show 91-98% of patients view ECT positively and would undergo it again if needed. These examples illustrate why scientific research, despite its limitations, remains our best safeguard against the psychological myths that pervade popular culture. As Einstein said, science "measured against reality, is primitive and childlike-and yet it is the most precious thing we have."

★★★★★

심리학의 오해 50가지 완독을 축하합니다

100만 명 이상의 학습자가 사랑합니다

“23일째 매일 사용하고 있어요. 이제 제 일상의 한 부분이 되었습니다.”

jayallen

심리학의 오해 50가지의 핵심 주제

scientific skepticism
psychological misconceptions
cognitive biases
myth busting
neurological fallacies

심리학의 오해 50가지의 명언

We should be most skeptical of the stories we think we know best.
Psychology permeates every aspect of modern life.
Our desire for easy answers makes us susceptible.
Understanding these sources of error is our best defense.
Seeing isn't always believing.

심리학의 오해 50가지의 등장인물

Scott O. LilienfeldAuthor and psychologist who debunks myths
Stephen Jay GouldScientist who advised skepticism of known stories

저자 소개

Scott O. Lilienfeld (1960–2020)는 *심리학의 50가지 대중적 오해: 인간 행동에 관한 널리 퍼진 잘못된 생각들을 깨부수다(50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology: Shattering Widespread Misconceptions About Human Behavior)*의 공동 저자로, 정신 건강 분야에서 증거 기반 접근 방식을 옹호한 저명한 임상 심리학자이자 과학적 회의주의자였습니다.

에모리 대학교의 사무엘 캔들러 돕스(Samuel Candler Dobbs) 심리학 교수로 재직하며, 그는 이 오해 타파 작업의 핵심 주제인 유사과학적 주장의 실체 규명, 사이코패스 연구, 진단 방법론 개선을 전문으로 했습니다. 릴리엔펠트의 권위는 학계를 넘어 *뉴욕 타임스(The New York Times)*와 *사이언티픽 아메리칸(Scientific American)*에 정기적으로 기고하고, CNN과 *CBS 이브닝 뉴스(CBS Evening News)*에 출연하며, 뇌를 읽는 사람들(Brainwashed: The Seductive Appeal of Mindless Neuroscience) 및 *로르샤흐 검사의 무엇이 잘못되었나?(What’s Wrong with the Rorschach?)*와 같은 영향력 있는 저서를 통해 널리 알려졌습니다.

그는 검증되지 않은 치료법을 면밀히 조사하기 위해 *정신 건강 실무의 과학적 검토(The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice)*를 창간하여 대중 심리학에 대한 엄격한 비판가로서의 유산을 공고히 했습니다. 복잡한 연구를 이해하기 쉬운 통찰로 풀어냈다는 찬사를 받은 심리학의 50가지 대중적 오해는 심리학 과정의 초석이 되는 텍스트가 되었으며, 여러 언어로 번역되어 전 세계적으로 10만 부 이상 판매되었습니다.

심리학의 오해 50가지 요약 다운로드

심리학의 오해 50가지 요약을 무료 PDF 또는 EPUB으로 받으세요. 인쇄하거나 오프라인에서 언제든 읽을 수 있습니다.

다른 사용자들도 좋아한 책

Myth-Busting: Common Misconceptions Exposed 책 표지

6 sources

Myth-Busting: Common Misconceptions Exposed

The myths of innovation

Scott Berkun

50 Psychology Ideas You Really Need To Know

Adrian Furnham

People of the lie

M. Scott Peck

Psychobabble

Stephen Briers

Collective Illusions

Todd Rose

Why People Believe Weird Things

Michael Shermer

50 Psychology Classics

Tom Butler-Bowdon

이 책에 대한 FAQ

더 알아보기

학습 계획

The Psychology of National Myths

In an era of deep polarization, understanding the cognitive roots of national identity is essential for navigating modern propaganda. This plan is designed for sociologists, political strategists, and curious minds seeking to decode how ideologies hijack the human brain.

40 m•4 섹션

학습 계획

I want books that give me phycology facts

This learning plan is perfect for curious readers who want to bridge the gap between scientific research and everyday life. It offers a structured path through cognitive, social, and clinical psychology for anyone looking to understand themselves and others better.

5 h 2 m•4 섹션

학습 계획

Psychology

Understanding the human psyche is essential for navigating modern relationships, leadership, and personal well-being. This plan is ideal for curious learners and professionals seeking to master the mechanics of the mind, from cognitive biases to clinical wellness.

6 h 20 m•5 섹션

학습 계획

Why Your Memory Lies

This learning plan is essential for anyone interested in psychology, law, or personal development who wants to understand why our brains often misremember facts. It provides a scientific foundation for those looking to improve their decision-making and interpersonal communication by acknowledging the limits of human recall.

1 h 45 m•4 섹션

학습 계획

Master dark psychology & academic mind tricks

In today's complex social landscape, understanding psychological influence is both a defensive necessity and powerful advantage. This learning plan equips students, professionals, and anyone interested in human behavior with tools to recognize manipulation, protect their mental autonomy, and ethically apply psychological principles for academic and personal success.

3 h 58 m•4 섹션

학습 계획

Support and Science of Depression

This learning plan bridges the gap between clinical science and practical empathy, making it essential for anyone seeking to understand the mechanics of mental health. It is particularly beneficial for caregivers, students of psychology, or individuals looking for evidence-based insights into the recovery process.

2 h•4 섹션

학습 계획

The Mind of History

This plan bridges the gap between historical events and the psychological forces that drove them. It is ideal for history enthusiasts and psychology students seeking to understand the human behavior behind global shifts.

2 h 15 m•4 섹션

학습 계획

The Mentalist's Toolkit

This toolkit is essential for anyone looking to master the art of human observation and psychological influence. Professionals in high-stakes negotiation, sales, or leadership will benefit from the ability to read people and control social dynamics with precision.

1 h 30 m•3 섹션

샌프란시스코에서 컬럼비아 대학교 동문들이 만들었습니다

LOVED BY

1,000,000+ curious minds.

4.7

avg rating

1M+ learners

"Instead of endless scrolling, I just hit play on BeFreed. It saves me so much time."

@Moemenn

"I never knew where to start with nonfiction—BeFreed’s book lists turned into podcasts gave me a clear path."

@Chloe, Solo founder, LA

117

"Perfect balance between learning and entertainment. Finished ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow’ on my commute this week."

@Raaaaaachelw

"Crazy how much I learned while walking the dog. BeFreed = small habits → big gains."

@Matt, YC alum

108

"Reading used to feel like a chore. Now it’s just part of my lifestyle."

@Erin, Investment Banking Associate , NYC

254

"Feels effortless compared to reading. I’ve finished 6 books this month already."

@djmikemoore

"BeFreed turned my guilty doomscrolling into something that feels productive and inspiring."

@Pitiful

4.5K

"BeFreed turned my commute into learning time. 20-min podcasts are perfect for finishing books I never had time for."

@SofiaP

"BeFreed replaced my podcast queue. Imagine Spotify for books — that’s it. 🙌"

@Jaded_Falcon

201

"It is great for me to learn something from the book without reading it."

@OojasSalunke

"The themed book list podcasts help me connect ideas across authors—like a guided audio journey."

@Leo, Law Student, UPenn

483

"Makes me feel smarter every time before going to work"

@Cashflowbubu

웹에서 BeFreed가 어떻게 논의되고 있는지 더 보기

샌프란시스코에서 컬럼비아 대학교 동문들이 만들었습니다

LOVED BY

1,000,000+ curious minds.

4.7

avg rating

1M+ learners

"Instead of endless scrolling, I just hit play on BeFreed. It saves me so much time."

@Moemenn

"I never knew where to start with nonfiction—BeFreed’s book lists turned into podcasts gave me a clear path."

@Chloe, Solo founder, LA

117

"Perfect balance between learning and entertainment. Finished ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow’ on my commute this week."

@Raaaaaachelw

"Crazy how much I learned while walking the dog. BeFreed = small habits → big gains."

@Matt, YC alum

108

"Reading used to feel like a chore. Now it’s just part of my lifestyle."

@Erin, Investment Banking Associate , NYC

254

"Feels effortless compared to reading. I’ve finished 6 books this month already."

@djmikemoore

"BeFreed turned my guilty doomscrolling into something that feels productive and inspiring."

@Pitiful

4.5K

"BeFreed turned my commute into learning time. 20-min podcasts are perfect for finishing books I never had time for."

@SofiaP

"BeFreed replaced my podcast queue. Imagine Spotify for books — that’s it. 🙌"

@Jaded_Falcon

201

"It is great for me to learn something from the book without reading it."

@OojasSalunke

"The themed book list podcasts help me connect ideas across authors—like a guided audio journey."

@Leo, Law Student, UPenn

483

"Makes me feel smarter every time before going to work"

@Cashflowbubu

"Instead of endless scrolling, I just hit play on BeFreed. It saves me so much time."

@Moemenn

"I never knew where to start with nonfiction—BeFreed’s book lists turned into podcasts gave me a clear path."

@Chloe, Solo founder, LA

117

"Perfect balance between learning and entertainment. Finished ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow’ on my commute this week."

@Raaaaaachelw

"Crazy how much I learned while walking the dog. BeFreed = small habits → big gains."

@Matt, YC alum

108

"Reading used to feel like a chore. Now it’s just part of my lifestyle."

@Erin, Investment Banking Associate , NYC

254

"Feels effortless compared to reading. I’ve finished 6 books this month already."

@djmikemoore

"BeFreed turned my guilty doomscrolling into something that feels productive and inspiring."

@Pitiful

4.5K

"BeFreed turned my commute into learning time. 20-min podcasts are perfect for finishing books I never had time for."

@SofiaP

"BeFreed replaced my podcast queue. Imagine Spotify for books — that’s it. 🙌"

@Jaded_Falcon

201

"It is great for me to learn something from the book without reading it."

@OojasSalunke

"The themed book list podcasts help me connect ideas across authors—like a guided audio journey."

@Leo, Law Student, UPenn

483

"Makes me feel smarter every time before going to work"

@Cashflowbubu

"Instead of endless scrolling, I just hit play on BeFreed. It saves me so much time."

@Moemenn

"I never knew where to start with nonfiction—BeFreed’s book lists turned into podcasts gave me a clear path."

@Chloe, Solo founder, LA

117

"Perfect balance between learning and entertainment. Finished ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow’ on my commute this week."

@Raaaaaachelw

"Crazy how much I learned while walking the dog. BeFreed = small habits → big gains."

@Matt, YC alum

108

"Reading used to feel like a chore. Now it’s just part of my lifestyle."

@Erin, Investment Banking Associate , NYC

254

"Feels effortless compared to reading. I’ve finished 6 books this month already."

@djmikemoore

"BeFreed turned my guilty doomscrolling into something that feels productive and inspiring."

@Pitiful

4.5K

"BeFreed turned my commute into learning time. 20-min podcasts are perfect for finishing books I never had time for."

@SofiaP

"BeFreed replaced my podcast queue. Imagine Spotify for books — that’s it. 🙌"

@Jaded_Falcon

201

"It is great for me to learn something from the book without reading it."

@OojasSalunke

"The themed book list podcasts help me connect ideas across authors—like a guided audio journey."

@Leo, Law Student, UPenn

483

"Makes me feel smarter every time before going to work"

@Cashflowbubu

웹에서 BeFreed가 어떻게 논의되고 있는지 더 보기

지금 바로 학습 여정을 시작하세요

8장

심리학의 오해 50가지

개요심리학의 오해 50가지 개요

한 권의 책, 다양한 듣기 방식.

The Psychology of Misconception: Why We Believe What Isn't True

The Myth-Making Mind: How Psychological Misconceptions Take Root

들리는 모든 단어를 눈으로 확인하세요

Brain Myths: The Neuroscience Behind Our Misconceptions

The Psychology of Perception: Seeing Isn't Always Believing

심리학의 오해 50가지에서 더 많은 것을 얻으세요

Development Across the Lifespan: From Mozart Effect to Midlife Crisis

The Social Animal: Myths About Human Connection

들리는 모든 단어를 눈으로 확인하세요

Mental Health Misconceptions: From Diagnosis to Treatment

The Truth About Psychological Testing and Assessment

심리학의 오해 50가지에서 더 많은 것을 얻으세요

Science vs. Intuition: The Battle for Psychological Truth

심리학의 오해 50가지 완독을 축하합니다

심리학의 오해 50가지의 핵심 주제

심리학의 오해 50가지의 명언

심리학의 오해 50가지의 등장인물

저자 소개

심리학의 오해 50가지 요약 다운로드

다른 사용자들도 좋아한 책

이 책에 대한 FAQ

What is 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology about?

Who should read 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology?

Is 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology worth reading?

What are the most common myths debunked in 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology?

더 알아보기

1,000,000+ curious minds.

1,000,000+ curious minds.

한 권의 책, 다양한 듣기 방식.

The Psychology of Misconception: Why We Believe What Isn't True

The Myth-Making Mind: How Psychological Misconceptions Take Root

들리는 모든 단어를 눈으로 확인하세요

Brain Myths: The Neuroscience Behind Our Misconceptions

The Psychology of Perception: Seeing Isn't Always Believing

심리학의 오해 50가지에서 더 많은 것을 얻으세요

Development Across the Lifespan: From Mozart Effect to Midlife Crisis

The Social Animal: Myths About Human Connection

들리는 모든 단어를 눈으로 확인하세요

Mental Health Misconceptions: From Diagnosis to Treatment

The Truth About Psychological Testing and Assessment

심리학의 오해 50가지에서 더 많은 것을 얻으세요

Science vs. Intuition: The Battle for Psychological Truth

심리학의 오해 50가지 완독을 축하합니다

다른 사용자들도 좋아한 책

더 알아보기

심리학의 오해 50가지 개요