20-item scale measuring receptivity to scientific bullshit. Ten items are plausible-sounding but meaningless statements; ten are genuine scientific statements.
Estimated Time
~5 mins
Instrument Scale
Standardized Items
Administration
Self-Administered
Scoring Engine
Automated Real-Time
Scale Overview & Construct
20-item scale measuring receptivity to scientific bullshit. Ten items are plausible-sounding but meaningless statements; ten are genuine scientific statements.
20-item scale measuring receptivity to scientific bullshit. Ten items are plausible-sounding but meaningless statements; ten are genuine scientific statements. Based on your answers to its 20 items, you'll get a breakdown across its 2 component areas as well as an overall picture, showing where the pattern is strongest for you. Your result gives you a clearer picture of this particular thinking style or tendency, and how consistently it shows up for you.
Instrument Specifications
Target Population
Teachers, Educators & Faculty
Administration Format
Self-Administered
Intended Domain / Purpose
Research & Empirical Study
Recommended Age Bracket
Adults (18+ yrs)
Duration & Pacing
5 Minutes (Self-Paced)
Access License
Open Creative Commons
Academic Citation & Instrument Provenance
When referencing this instrument in research, academic theses, or clinical institutional audits, please cite the original author publication:
License: CC BY 4.0. Citation: Evans, A. M., Sleegers, W., & Mlakar, Z. (2020). Individual differences in receptivity to scientific bullshit. Judgment and Decision Making, 15(3), 401–412.
Governance, Boundaries & Ethical Use
Construct Boundaries & Interpretive Limitations
Imported from the OpenScales open item-bank project. This specific digital implementation has not been independently clinically validated by PsiQ — scores are for self-reflection, research, and educational purposes only.
License: CC BY 4.0. Citation: Evans, A. M., Sleegers, W., & Mlakar, Z. (2020). Individual differences in receptivity to scientific bullshit. Judgment and Decision Making, 15(3), 401–412.
