Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Relationships Between Paranormal Belief, Creationism, Intelligent Design and Evolution at Secondary Schools in Vienna (Austria)

  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present study is the first to investigate the relationships between a multiple set of paranormal beliefs and the acceptance of evolution, creationism, and intelligent design, respectively, in Europe. Using a questionnaire, 2,129 students at secondary schools in Vienna (Austria) answered the 26 statements of the Revised Paranormal Belief Scale (R-PBS) and three statements about naturalistic evolution, creationism and intelligent design (ID). The investigated Austrian students showed an average R-PBS score of 82.08, more than 50% of them agreed with naturalistic evolution, 28% with creationism, and more than a third agreed with ID, the latter two closely correlated with each other. Females generally showed higher belief scores in the paranormal, creationism and ID. The agreement with naturalistic evolution correlated negatively with religious belief, but not with other paranormal beliefs, whereas the two non-scientific alternatives to evolution significantly correlated with both traditional and paranormal beliefs. Religious belief showed a significant positive correlation with other paranormal beliefs. All subscales of paranormal belief decreased during the eight grades of secondary school, as did acceptance of creationism and ID. However, the acceptance of naturalistic evolution did not correlate with age or grade. Possible reasons and implications for science education and the biology curriculum at Austrian secondary schools are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See Shankar (1989), Bishop and Anderson (1990), Scharman and Harris (1992), Shankar and Skoog (1993).

  2. See Haraldsson (1981), Irwin (1985), Svensen et al. (1992), Goode (2000), Orenstein (2002), Thalbourne (2003), Hergovich et al. (2005).

  3. E.g. the „life on other planets“ statement seems not to be a measurement for paranormal belief any more (cf. Burchell 2009); and Thalbourne (pers. comm. 1991, cit. in Irwin 1993) critically discussed the subscales defined by Tobacyk and Milford (1983).

  4. The “ID” statement used more accurately represents “theistic evolution”. ID exponents try to evoke doubts about naturalistic evolution via the “irreducible complexity” argument, but usually do not explicitly define how the actual diversity of organisms came to existence. However, in German speaking countries, theistic evolution is usually seen as synonymous with ID.

  5. See Tobacyk (1984), Wierzbicki (1985), Messer and Griggs (1989), Musch and Ehrenberg (2002).

  6. See Shankar (1989), Bishop and Anderson (1990), Scharman and Harris (1992), Shankar and Skoog (1993).

  7. i.e. in God.

  8. i.e. any other paranormal ideas.

  9. For a comparison, the United States ranked 36th with a mean of 489.

References

  • Abgrall, J. M. (2000). Soul snatchers. The mechanics of cults. New York: Algora Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ausubel, D. P. (1971). Das Jugendalter. München: Juventa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, R., & Miller, J. P. (2001). Erosion of belief and disbelief: Effects of religiosity and negative affect on beliefs in the paranormal and supernatural. The Journal of Social Psychology, 14, 277–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BGBl II Nr 133. (2000). Änderung der Verordnung über die Lehrpläne der allgemeinbildenden höheren Schulen. Vienna: Print Media Austria AG. Available at http://ris.bka.gv.at/Dokumente/BgblPdf/2000_133_2/2000_133_2.pdf.

  • BGBl II Nr 277. (2004). Änderung der Verordnung über die Lehrpläne der allgemein bildenden höheren Schulen. Vienna: Print Media Austria AG. Available at http://ris.bka.gv.at/Dokumente/BgblAuth/BGBLA_2004_II_277/BGBLA_2004_II_277.pdf.

  • Bishop, B., & Anderson, C. (1990). Student conceptions of natural selection and its role in evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 415–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brasseur, A. (2009). Gefahren des Kreationismus für die Bildung. Die Sicht der parlamentarischen Versammlung des Europarats. In O. Kraus (Ed.), Evolutionstheorie und Kreationismus—ein Gegensatz (pp. 119–126). Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broad, C. D. (1953). The relevance of psychical research to philosophy. In J. Ludwig (Ed.), Philosophy and parapsychology (pp. 43–63). Buffalo, NY: Prometheus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulbulia, J. (2004). The cognitive and evolutionary psychology of religion. Biology and Philosophy, 19, 655–686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burchell, M. (2009). Life: What is the chance that we are alone? Significance, 6, 142–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, S. (1985). A double-blind test of astrology. Nature, 318, 419–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council of Europe, Parliamentary Assembly. (2007). The dangers of creationism in education. Adopted by the Assembly on 4 October 2007 (35th Sitting), Resolution 1580.

  • Demastes, S. S., Trowbridge, J. E., & Cummins, C. L. (1992). Information for science education literature on the teaching and learning of evolution. In R. Good, et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the I992 evolution education research conference (pp. 42–71). Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University.

  • Demastes, S. S., Settlage, J., & Good, R. (1995). Students conceptions of natural selection and its role in evolution: Cases of replication and comparison. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 535–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobzhansky, T. (1964). Biology, molecular and organismic. American Zoologist, 4, 443–452.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emmons, R. A., & Paloutzian, R. F. (2003). The psychology of religion. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 377–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emmons, C. F., & Sobal, J. (1981). Paranormal beliefs: Functional alternatives to mainstream religion? Review of Religious Research, 22, 301–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishman, Y. I. (2009). Can science test supernatural worldviews? Science & Education, 18, 813–837.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster, K. R., & Kokko, H. (2009). The evolution of superstitious and superstition-like behaviour. Proceedings of Biological Sciences, 276(1654), 31–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FOWID (Forschungsgruppe für Weltanschauungen in Deutschland). (2008). Religionszugehörigkeit, Deutschland. Bevölkerung 1950–2008. Available at http://fowid.de/fileadmin/datenarchiv/Religionszugehoerigkeit_Bevoelkerung__1950-2008.pdf.

  • FOWID (Forschungsgruppe für Weltanschauungen in Deutschland). (2005). Evolution/Kreationismus, Befragte ab 14 Jahren. Available at http://fowid.de/fileadmin/datenarchiv/Evolution_Kreationismus_Deutschland__2005.pdf.

  • GfK Austria. (2009). Einstellungen der ÖsterreicherInnen zur Evolution. Available at http://www.oeaw.ac.at/shared/news/2009/pdf/pk_presseunterlagen_web.pdf.

  • Goode, E. (2000). Two paranormals or two and a half? An empirical exploration. Skeptical Inquirer, 24, 29–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorsuch, R. L. (1988). Psychology of religion. Annual Review of Psychology, 39, 201–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graf, D. (Ed.). (2010). Evolutionstheorie. Akzeptanz und Vermittlung im europäischen Vergleich. New York/Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, W. D. (1991). Thinking critically about new age ideas. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraldsson, E. (1981). Some determinants of belief in psychical phenomena. Journal of the American Society Psychical Research, 75, 297–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraldsson, E., & Houtkooper, J. M. (1996). Traditional christian beliefs, spiritualism, and the paranormal: An Icelandic-American comparison. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 6, 51–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harder, B. (2001). Die X-Teens. Hamburg: Heinrich Ellermann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heard, K. V., & Vyse, S. A. (1999). Authoritarianism and paranormal beliefs. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 18, 121–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hergovich, A. (2005). Der Glaube an Psi. Die Psychologie paranormaler Überzeugungen. Bern: Huber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hergovich, A., & Arendasy, M. (2005). Critical thinking ability and belief in the paranormal. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1805–1812.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hergovich, A., Schott, R., & Arendasy, M. (2005). Paranormal belief and religiosity. The Journal of Parapsychology, 69, 293–304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunsberger, B., Owusu, V., & Duck, R. (1999). Religion and prejudice in Ghana and Canada: Religious fundamentalism, right-wing authoritarianism, and attitudes toward homosexuals and women. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 9, 181–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huntley, C., & Peeters, T. (2005). Paranormal beliefs, religious beliefs and personality correlates. Available at http://www.ethesis.net/paranormal/paranormal_contence.htm.

  • Illner, R. (2000) Schülervorstellungen auf die Akzeptanz der Evolutionstheorie. Dissertation, BIS Carl von Ossietzky Universität, Oldenburg. Available at http://oops.uni-oldenburg.de/frontdoor.php?source_opus=421.

  • Irwin, H. J. (1985). A study of the measurement and the correlates of paranormal belief. Journal of the American Society Psychical Research, 79, 301–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irwin, H. J. (1993). Belief in the paranormal: A review of the empirical literature. The Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 87, 1–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, F. C., & McCulloch, C. E. (1990). Multivariate analysis in ecology and systematics: Panacea or Pandora’s box? Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 21, 129–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johannsen, M., & Krüger, D. (2005). Schülervorstellungen zur Evolution—eine quantitative Studie. IDB Münster—Ber Inst Didaktik Biologie, 14, 23–48. Available at http://miami.uni-muenster.de/servlets/DerivateServlet/Derivate-3152/Krueger.pdf.

  • Jolliffe, I. T. (2002). Principal component analysis. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Junker, T. (2007). Schöpfung gegen Evolution—und kein Ende? Kardinal Schönborns Intelligent-Design-Kampagne und die katholische Kirche. In U. Kutschera (Ed.), Kreationismus in Deutschland. Fakten und Analysen (pp. 71–97). Münster: Naturwissenschaft und Glaube 1, Lit-Verlag. Available at http://www.thomas-junker.homepage.t-online.de/pdf/07tjks.pdf.

  • Krainer, K., & Müller, R. (2010). IMST. In Austrian Federal Ministry for Education, Arts And Culture (Ed.), Austrian Education News (pp. 1–4). Wien: BMUKK. Available at http://www.bmukk.gv.at/medienpool/19219/aen_10_01_61.pdf.

  • Krosnick, J. A., & Alwin, D. F. (1987). An evaluation of a cognitive theory of response-order effects in survey measurement. Public Opinion Quarterly, 51, 201–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, D. (1999). A developmental model of critical thinking. Educational Researcher, 28, 16–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemay, M., Fricker, S., Galesic, M., Tourangeau, R., & Yan, T. (2009). Effect of interview pace and items position on satisficing. Annual meeting of the American Association For Public Opinion Association, Fontainebleau Resort, Miami Beach, FL. Available at http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p16698_index.html.

  • Lindeman, M., & Aarnio, K. (2006). Paranormal beliefs: Their dimensionality and correlates. European Journal of Personality, 20, 585–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindeman, M., & Aarnio, K. (2007). Superstitious, magical, and paranormal beliefs: An integrative model. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 731–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, M. (1994). Pseudoscience, the paranormal, and science education. Science & Education, 3, 357–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin-Hansen, L. M. (2008). First-year college students’ conflict with religion and science. Science & Education, 17, 317–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, M. R. (2009). Science, worldviews and education: An introduction. Science & Education, 18, 641–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McClendon, M. J. (1991). Acquiescence and recency response-order effects in interview surveys. Sociological Methods and Research, 20, 60–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKinnon, A. M. (2003). The religious, the paranormal, and church attendance: A response to Orenstein. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 42, 299–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messer, W. S., & Griggs, R. A. (1989). Student belief and involvement in the paranormal and performance in introductory psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 16, 187–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J. D., Scott, E. C., & Okamoto, S. (2006). Public acceptance of evolution. Science, 313, 765–766.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musch, J., & Ehrenberg, K. (2002). Probability misjudgment, cognitive ability, and belief in the paranormal. British Journal of Psychology, 93, 169–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norušis, J. M. (1990). SPSS PC and statistics 4.0. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norušis, J. M. (2002). SPSS for windows-based system user’s guide release 11.5.. Chicago: SPSS Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oerter, R. (1973). Moderne Entwicklungspsychologie. Donauwörth: Ludwig Auer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orenstein, A. (2002). Religion and paranormal belief. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 41, 301–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennock, R. T. (2003). Creationism and intelligent design. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, 4, 143–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perakh, M. (2003). Unintelligent design. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Persinger, M. A., & Makarec, K. (1990). Exotic beliefs may be substitutes for religious beliefs. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 71, 16–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, T. W. (2003). Believe it or not: Religious and other paranormal beliefs in the United States. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 42, 95–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riexinger, M. (2009). Der islamische Kreationismus. In O. Kraus (Ed.), Evolutionstheorie und Kreatio-nismus—ein Gegensatz (pp. 97–118). Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudolph, J. L., & Stewart, J. (1998). Evolution and the nature of science: On the historical discord and its implications for education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 1069–1089.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scharmann, L. C., & Harris, W. M. (1992). Teaching evolution: Understanding and applying the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 375–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiemann, S. (2010). Socioeconomic status and beliefs about god’s influence in everyday life. Sociology of Religion. doi:10.1093/socrel/srq004.

  • Schönborn C (2005) Finding design in nature. The New York Times. Available at http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/07/opinion/07schonborn.html?_r=1.

  • Schwabe, M., & Radinger, R. (2010). Bildung in Zahlen 2008/2009. Schlüsselindikatoren und Analysen. Wien: Statistik Austria. Available at http://www.statistik.at/web_de/dynamic/statistiken/bildung_und_kultur/publdetail?id=5&listid=5&detail=560.

  • Shankar, G. (1989). Factors influencing the teaching of evolution and creationism in Texas Public high school biology classes. Dissertation, Texas Tech University.

  • Shankar, G., & Skoog, G. D. (1993). Emphasis given evolution and creationism by Texas high school biology teachers. Science Education, 77, 221–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skoog, G. (2005). The coverage of human evolution in high school biology textbooks in the 20th century and in current state science standards. Science & Education, 14, 395–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svensen, S. G., White, K. D., & Caird, D. (1992). Replications and resolutions: Dualistic belief, personality, religiosity, and paranormal belief in Australian students. Journal of Psychology, 126, 445–447.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thalbourne, M. A. (2003). Theism and belief in the paranormal. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 67, 208–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thalbourne, M. A., & Hensley, J. H. (2001). Religiosity and belief in the paranormal. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 65, 47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thalbourne, M. A., & Houtkooper, J. M. (2002). Religiosity/spirituality and belief in the paranormal: A German replication. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 66, 113–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobacyk, J. J. (1984). Paranormal belief and college grade point average. Psychological Reports, 54, 217–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobacyk, J. J. (2004). A revised paranormal belief scale. The International Journal of Transpersonal Studies, 23, 94–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobacyk, J. J., & Milford, G. (1983). Belief in paranormal phenomena: Assessment instrument development and implications for personality functioning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 648–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Dijk, E. M., & Kattmann, U. (2010). Evolution education: A study of teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Z Didaktik Naturwiss, 16, 7–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Dijk, E. M., & Reydon, T. A. C. (2010). A conceptual analysis of evolutionary theory for teacher education. Science & Education, 19, 6–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Eye, A., Lösel, F., & Mayzer, R. (2003). Is it all written in the stars? A methodological commentary on Sachs’ astrology monograph and re-analyses of his data on crime statistics. Psychological Science, 45, 78–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wandersee, J., Good, R., & Demastes, S. S. (1995). Forschung zum Unterricht über Evolution: Eine Be-standsaufnahme. Z Didaktik Naturwiss, 1, 43–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wierzbicki, M. (1985). Reasoning errors and belief in the paranormal. The Journal of Social Psychology, 125, 489–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge the permission to perform this study in the classrooms by the Vienna Board of Education (Stadtschulrat für Wien) and the directors of the participating schools, Karl Heinz Hochschorner, Klemens Kerbler, Hubert Kopeszki, Georg Latzke, Günter Maresch, Inge Pollak, Hans-Leopold Rudolf, Albert Schmalz, Margaret Witek, and Elfriede Wotke. The teachers Heidemarie Amon, Ursula Fraunschiel, Bettina Girschick, Simon Götsch, Doris Kruder, Kathrin Schandl, Peter Schandl, Christine Strondl, Johann Turic, and the biology students Lisa C. Auleitner, Stefanie Bruns, Tobias Schernhammer, Iris Starnberger, Klaus Tscherner, and Michaela Urbauer collected answers in the classrooms and on the street, respectively. We appreciate the useful hints by Martin Scheuch (University of Vienna, AECC Biology) on questionnaire design. Not less than seven reviewers made critical but very constructive comments on the manuscript. Finally, we express our gratitude to all participants of this study, especially to those who cheered up data entry with attached comments like “There is a devil.—Yes: it is teacher S.” or “The Loch Ness monster exists.—Yes: it is teacher K.”

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Evolutionary Biology, University of Vienna, UZA-I Althanstraße 14, 1090, Vienna, Austria

    Erich Eder & Norbert Milasowszky

  2. GRG 12, Erlgasse 32-34, 1120, Vienna, Austria

    Katharina Turic

  3. Wellesley College, 106 Central Street, Wellesley, MA, 02481, USA

    Katherine Van Adzin

  4. Department of Psychological Basic Research, University of Vienna, Liebiggasse 5, 1010, Vienna, Austria

    Andreas Hergovich

Authors
  1. Erich Eder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Katharina Turic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Norbert Milasowszky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Katherine Van Adzin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Andreas Hergovich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erich Eder.

Appendices

Appendix 1

The original questionnaire of the revised Paranormal Belief Scale by Tobacyk (2004).

R-PBS_01:

The soul continues to exist though the body may die

R-PBS_02:

Some individuals are able to levitate (lift) objects through mental forces

R-PBS_03:

Black magic really exists

R-PBS_04:

Black cats can bring bad luck

R-PBS_05:

Your mind or soul can leave your body and travel (astral projection)

R-PBS_06:

The Yeti (abominable snowman of Tibet) exists

R-PBS_07:

Astrology is a way to accurately predict the future

R-PBS_08:

There is a devil

R-PBS_09:

Psychokinesis, the movement of objects through psychic powers, does exist

R-PBS_10:

Witches do exist

R-PBS_11:

If you break a mirror, you will have bad luck

R-PBS_12:

During altered states, such as sleep or trances, the spirit can leave the body

R-PBS_13:

The Loch Ness monster of Scotland exists

R-PBS_14:

The horoscope accurately tells a person’s future

R-PBS_15:

I believe in God

R-PBS_16:

A person’s thoughts can influence the movement of a physical object

R-PBS_17:

Through the use of formulas and incantations, it is possible to cast spells on persons

R-PBS_18:

The number “13” is unlucky

R-PBS_19:

Reincarnation does occur

R-PBS_20:

There is life on other planets

R-PBS_21:

Some psychics can accurately predict the future

R-PBS_22:

There is a heaven and a hell

R-PBS_23:

Mind reading is not possible

R-PBS_24:

There are actual cases of witchcraft

R-PBS_25:

It is possible to communicate with the dead

R-PBS_26:

Some people have an unexplained ability to predict the future

Appendix 2

Principal component loadings for our 29 questionnaire statements, based on a sample size of 2,129 secondary school students. The highest correlations between single statements and principal component axes are given in bold. An asterisk shows the statements originally belonging to one subscale.

The principal components confirm the R-PBS subcales, except for statement 1 (“the soul continues to exist”, originally supposed to belong to the subscale “traditional religious belief”), which showed a closer relationship to the subscale “spiritualism” in our sample, and for statement 23 (“mind reading is not possible”), which loaded more closely upon the subscale “precognition”. Both the statements 25 (“it is possible to communicate with the dead”) and 20 (“there is life on other planets”) did not significantly load upon one of the seven principal components.

Principal component (PC) 1 (12% of variance) was equivalent to subscale “traditional religious belief”. PC 2 (10.1% of variance) was equivalent to subscale “witchcraft”, PC 3 (9.8% of var.) to subscale “precognition”, PC 4 (8.5% of var.) to subscale “superstition”, PC 5 (8.3% of var.) to subscale “Psi”, PC 6 (8.3% of var.) to subscale “spiritualism”, and PC 7 (5.7% of var.) to subscale “extraordinary life forms”. Remarkably, all three statements on evolution cohered with PC 1: “ID” and “creationism” correlated positively with PC 1, and “naturalistic evolution” correlated negatively with PC 1.

 

PC 1

PC 2

PC 3

PC 4

PC 5

PC 6

PC 7

R-PBS_01

0.48*

0.10

0.07

−0.03

0.06

0.63

0.03

R-PBS_02

0.03

0.22

0.20

0.08

0.81*

0.16

0.08

R-PBS_03

0.08

0.66*

0.16

0.17

0.30

0.15

0.06

R-PBS_04

0.15

0.14

0.10

0.79*

0.08

0.04

0.02

R-PBS_05

0.09

0.25

0.09

0.13

0.27

0.66*

0.00

R-PBS_06

0.02

0.16

0.13

0.13

0.07

0.05

0.79*

R-PBS_07

0.13

−0.02

0.63*

0.34

0.11

0.16

0.16

R-PBS_08

0.59*

0.46

−0.23

0.14

−0.02

0.13

0.17

R-PBS_09

0.06

0.25

0.15

0.12

0.78*

0.19

0.14

R-PBS_10

−0.03

0.69*

0.19

0.11

0.14

0.16

0.23

R-PBS_11

0.12

0.15

0.14

0.76*

0.06

0.14

0.08

R-PBS_12

0.05

0.28

0.08

0.17

0.19

0.64*

0.06

R-PBS_13

0.05

0.19

0.14

0.13

0.15

0.01

0.77*

R-PBS_14

0.11

0.00

0.61*

0.41

0.16

0.06

0.15

R-PBS_15

0.78*

−0.07

0.08

0.11

0.07

0.11

−0.06

R-PBS_16

0.08

0.23

0.23

0.13

0.73*

0.20

0.09

R-PBS_17

0.17

0.60*

0.18

0.29

0.25

0.16

0.08

R-PBS_18

0.10

0.12

0.12

0.71*

0.11

0.02

0.12

R-PBS_19

0.03

0.10

0.36

0.06

0.12

0.65*

0.09

R-PBS_20

−0.31

−0.01

0.02

−0.08

0.06

0.39

0.43*

R-PBS_21

0.10

0.35

0.69*

0.19

0.15

0.15

0.09

R-PBS_22

0.72*

0.22

−0.05

0.22

0.02

0.18

0.07

R-PBS_23

0.01

0.26

0.60

−0.05

0.10*

0.04

0.01

R-PBS_24

0.03

0.66*

0.36

0.07

0.18

0.17

0.12

R-PBS_25

0.09

0.45

0.40

0.02

0.21

0.35*

0.07

R-PBS_26

0.06

0.35

0.63*

0.08

0.29

0.21

0.10

Evolution

−0.57

−0.03

−0.13

0.16

0.07

0.20

0.03

Creationism

0.76

−0.03

0.13

0.24

0.10

−0.01

0.00

ID

0.78

0.03

0.09

0.09

0.10

0.16

−0.02

Explained variance

12.03%

10.13%

9.78%

8.49%

8.35%

8.28%

5.72%

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Eder, E., Turic, K., Milasowszky, N. et al. The Relationships Between Paranormal Belief, Creationism, Intelligent Design and Evolution at Secondary Schools in Vienna (Austria). Sci & Educ 20, 517–534 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9327-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9327-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation