Skip to content

Scientific consensus contradicts this claim.

What's still open

What the evidence found 3 findings
Based on 8 sources:
PMC - NIH peer-reviewed View
Journal of Expertise peer-reviewed View
ResearchGate peer-reviewed View
Murdoch University institutional View
Psychology of Learning and Motivation peer-reviewed View
Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance peer-reviewed View
ResearchGate publication on cross-sectional design limitations peer-reviewed View
PMC article on cross-sectional studies peer-reviewed View
Based on 7 sources:
A Mind for Numbers - Barbara Oakley institutional View
MPCE-046: Applied Positive Psychology institutional View
NCBI - NIH peer-reviewed View
PMC - NIH peer-reviewed View
Centre for Early Childhood institutional View
Cleveland Clinic institutional View
PMC peer-reviewed View
Based on 2 sources:
MIT Economics Department institutional View
ResearchGate peer-reviewed View
What research hasn't answered 3 gaps
PMC - NIH peer-reviewed View
Journal of Expertise peer-reviewed View
ResearchGate peer-reviewed View
Murdoch University institutional View
Psychology of Learning and Motivation peer-reviewed View
PMC - NIH peer-reviewed View
Journal of Expertise peer-reviewed View
ResearchGate peer-reviewed View
Murdoch University institutional View
Psychology of Learning and Motivation peer-reviewed View
Sources 18 findings
argumentation Unknown
argumentation Unknown
argumentation Unknown
tree-leaf argumentation
tree-leaf argumentation
tree-leaf argumentation
tree-leaf argumentation
tree-leaf argumentation
tree-leaf argumentation
tree-leaf argumentation
tree-leaf argumentation
tree-leaf argumentation
tree-leaf argumentation
tree-leaf argumentation
tree-leaf argumentation
tree-leaf argumentation
argumentation Unknown
argumentation Unknown
Push back on this read

Think the evidence is read wrong? Present your counter-evidence and we'll evaluate it against the 18 sources behind this analysis.

Related questions

Heard something that sounds off?

Generated by reaso.ai's editorial pipeline: claim restated, scientific consensus classified via 3-run majority vote, 18 findings enriched with attribution and study type, narrative written in neutral voice. No individual researcher has signed off on this specific analysis — see methodology for how the pipeline works. Built with Claude Sonnet by Anthropic. Updated April 16, 2026. How we do this →

Written by AI. Sources are linked for verification.