Write a 3-5-page literature review on the seven myth-busting articles provided.

Write a 3-5-page literature review on the seven myth-busting articles provided. The required sections are Introduction, Similarities, Differences, Summary, Conclusion, Hypothesis, and Variables.
Develop a plausible hypothesis surrounding the myth that people only use 10% of their brains, while the null hypothesis is that humans do not. Explain some of the different types of psychological research methodologies and the purpose of the psychological concepts addressed in research, such as variables (constructs, how measured), findings (correlated, not correlated), and the population being researched. Include forecasting human behavior using a theory or psychological concept while highlighting the advantages and drawbacks of the theory or psychological concept.
Experimental Material
MYTH: Humans only use 10% of their brains. Humans use only a small portion of their brains. Different people use different brain areas, but no one uses all of them.
Fact: This accounts for the differences in human talent and intelligence: what areas of the brain are used? But we all have untapped potential. The average human uses 100% of the brain daily, and there are no “silent areas” of a normal, healthy human brain.
Throughout an average day, evidence suggests humans use most of, if not all, of their brains, just as they use most, if not all, of their muscles. At specific points in the day, parts of the brain may be less active, and some tasks may only require some areas of the brain to perform them, but no part of the brain is “unused.”
**If a participant believes the myth and, given the above fact sheet, would alter their beliefs**
Include a summary of the findings and conclusions found in the research of the literature review based on the interpretation of the findings, such as whether my hypothesis was tested, whether there are gaps in the evidence, whether I need to ask other questions, and whether additional elements need to be investigated.
References:
Berinsky, A. J. (2017). Rumors and health care reform: Experiments in political misinformation. British Journal of Political Science, 47(2), 241-262.
Chan, M. S., Jones, C. R., Hall Jamieson, K., & Albarracín, D. (2017). Debunking: A Meta-Analysis of the Psychological Efficacy of Messages Countering Misinformation. Psychological Science, 28(11), 1531-1546.
Cook, J., Lewandowsky, S., & Ecker, U. K. H. (2017). Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation: Exposing misleading argumentation techniques reduces their influence. PLoS One, 12(5), 1-17.
Ecker, U. K. H., Hogan, J. L., & Lewandowsky, S. (2017). Reminders and repetition of misinformation: Helping or hindering its retraction? Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6(2), 185-192.
Pluviano, S., Watt, C., & Sergio, D. S. (2017). Misinformation lingers in memory: Failure of three pro-vaccination strategies. PLoS One, 12(7), 1-12.
Rapp, D. N., & Salovich, N. A. (2018). Can’t we just disregard fake news? The consequences of exposure to inaccurate information. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5(2), 232-239.
Sali, A. W., Anderson, B. A., & Courtney, S. M. (2018). Information processing biases in the brain: Implications for decision-making and self-governance. Neuroethics, 11(3), 259–271.