Neuroscience, also known as brain science, has made significant progress in uncovering the structure and functions of the human brain, as well as the neural mechanisms underlying learning and development [1,2]. It is a discipline at the forefront of scientific research and is highly valued by countries around the world. These advances have increasingly revealed the profound connections between neuroscience and education. This growing convergence has given rise to the interdisciplinary field of educational neuroscience. It is believed that this field provides critical insights for education and offers knowledge that can directly inform classroom teaching practices (e.g. [[3], [4], [5], [6]]). For instance, understanding neural development related to learning, the impact of stress on cognition, or mechanisms of memory formation can empower teachers to design more effective teaching strategies and better support diverse learners. Teachers who possess neuroscience knowledge can design curricula more aligned with brain working principles, select appropriate teaching methods, and better understand and support student development [3], thereby meeting diverse learning needs [5].

In the digital and AI-driven era, the landscape of teaching and learning is undergoing a fundamental transformation. This necessitates teachers to have a deeper understanding of the learning process, including the underlying brain mechanisms, placing higher demands on their neuroscience knowledge. Teacher neuroscience knowledge has thus become an important component of their professional development [7]. Globally, calls have been made to incorporate neuroscience content into teacher education programs (e.g. [[3], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12]]). Many countries have established requirements for specific neuroscience knowledge in professional standards for certain teacher specialties and incorporated neuroscience courses into teacher preparation programs (e.g. [13,14]). For example, the United Kingdom's Initial Teacher Training (ITT) Core Content Framework mandates neuroscience-related content for primary school teachers [15].

In China, neuroscience-related content has historically been marginalized in teacher professional standards and teacher education curricula [16]. However, scholars in China are increasingly advocating for enhancing teachers' neuroscience literacy, positioning it as a key professional competency indicator [17], and recommending its systematic integration into teacher education curricula [18].

While the academic community has not yet established a unified definition of “teachers’ neuroscience knowledge”, it generally refers to the body of neuroscientific understanding that educators should acquire to inform pedagogical practice. The earliest definition of neuroscience knowledge originates from Herculano-Houzel’s [19], who included understanding of the brain, misconceptions, and the mind-brain relationship, and the importance of brain research. Subsequent scholars and organizations like the OECD (2002) and researchers such as Howard-Jones et al. [20] and Dekker et al. [21] have further conceptualized it. Building upon this synthesis, this study defines teachers' neuroscience knowledge as comprising two key dimensions: (1) General brain knowledge, encompassing understanding of its structure, functions, and development; and (2) the ability to identify Neuromyths, which are persistent misconceptions about the brain, often with educational implications (e.g. [[22], [23], [24]).

In addition to knowledge, teachers’ neuroscience attitude is equally important, as they indicate receptivity to neuroscience and its implementation. These attitudes include their perceptions of the relationship between neuroscience and education, their understanding of its application, and their enthusiasm for such interrelations (e.g. [25,26]).

Several tools have been developed to assess these constructs. One of the most representative is the test devised by Dekker et al. [21], comprising items on general brain knowledge and neuromyth beliefs. This tool has been widely adopted or adapted globally, facilitating cross-cultural comparisons (e.g. [25,27,28]). Attitudes are often assessed using or adapting questionnaires like that of Pickering and Howard-Jones [26].

Globally, investigations into teachers’ neuroscience knowledge and attitudes have been conducted in over 20 countries [29]. Most studies reveal that teachers generally hold positive attitudes toward using neuroscience to guide teaching practices (e.g. [[26], [30], [31], [32]]) and perceive it as valuable for their work (e.g. [21,33,34]). However, teachers' actual neuroscience knowledge levels are often moderate (e.g. [[21], [35], [36], [37], [38]]), and neuromyths are highly prevalent, with identification accuracy typically between 30.0 % and 60.0 % across cultures, and the "learning styles" neuromyth is one of the most persistently endorsed [[29], [39]].

Despite positive attitudes, teachers rarely apply neuroscientific knowledge in practice [7]. This gap may reflect the challenges in translating abstract neuroscientific principles into concrete classroom applications. Some scholars like Horvath and colleagues have also questioned the direct negative impact of holding certain neuromyth beliefs on actual teaching effectiveness, suggesting the link might be less straightforward than often assumed [40]. This highlights the complexity of the relationship between knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, and practice.

Existing Chinese surveys have explored neuroscience knowledge among specific teacher populations like principals [28] or regional samples [27], and pre-service teacher in Hong Kong [25]. Complementing this, a recent study on Chinese psychology majors also revealed moderate neuroliteracy and a significant prevalence of certain neuromyths [41]. While these studies offer valuable insights, they often lack in-depth comparisons across diverse teacher groups (e.g., pre-service vs. in-service mainland Chinese teachers from various programs) or a comprehensive examination of influencing factors within these specific cohorts. This limits the ability to tailor interventions effectively. Furthermore, most research, both internationally and in China, has focused on in-service teachers’ neuroscience knowledge and attitudes, with less attention paid to pre-service teachers’ (e.g. [[31], [42], [43], [44]]). This predominant focus on in-service teachers reflects the immediate practical need for continuous professional development and support among practicing educators, given that effective interventions for in-service teachers are crucial for improving educational quality in real-world classroom settings. However, understanding the neuroscience literacy of pre-service teachers is equally critical, as their foundational training represents a key opportunity for intervention before misconceptions become deeply entrenched.

The factors influencing teachers’ neuroscience knowledge and attitudes are complex and not yet fully understood. Research has explored demographic variables like age, teaching experience, teaching subject, educational background. Some studies report no significant association between variables like age, teaching experience, or area of expertise and neuromyth distinction (e.g. [21,37,45]). However, other research indicates that younger teachers or those with higher educational attainment may better identify neuromyths (e.g. [22]), and that higher education levels or more exposure to neuroscience courses are associated with improved knowledge and reduced neuromyth beliefs (e.g. [[22], [33], [43], [46], [47]]). The source of information also plays a role, with unreliable media sources potentially fueling neuromyths (e.g. [[36], [46], [48]]).

The relationship between general brain knowledge and neuromyth beliefs is particularly debated. Some studies suggest higher knowledge correlates with fewer neuromyths (e.g. [[20], [42]]). Conversely, other studies, including the influential work by Dekker et al. [21] and research particularly involving pre-service teachers, found that higher general knowledge sometimes correlated with more neuromyths (e.g. [21,37]). This counterintuitive finding suggests that mere exposure to neuroscience information, if not accompanied by critical thinking skills or if sources are oversimplified, might inadvertently reinforce certain misconceptions. This highlights the need to investigate these relationships within specific educational contexts and teacher populations, such as those in China.

Given the aforementioned gaps—specifically the limited comparative data between pre-service and in-service teachers in mainland China and the inconsistent findings regarding influencing factors—this study aims to provide a comprehensive examination of neuroscience knowledge and attitudes among diverse teacher groups within Chinese teacher education programs. This research seeks to enrich international data and inform targeted improvements to neuroscience literacy integration within Chinese teacher development policies and curricula.

The study addresses the following research questions (RQs) and hypotheses (Hs): RQ1: What is the current status of neuroscience knowledge (general brain knowledge and neuromyth beliefs) and attitudes among pre-service and in-service teachers in selected Chinese teacher education programs? H1: Both pre-service and in-service teachers will demonstrate moderate neuroscience knowledge levels alongside high prevalence of neuromyths, while hold positive attitudes toward neuroscience applications in education, consistent with international findings.

RQ2: Are there significant differences in neuroscience knowledge and attitudes between pre-service and in-service teacher groups? H2: Pre-service teachers will demonstrate higher general neuroscience knowledge and lower neuromyth beliefs than in-service teachers, given their potentially more recent exposure to formal academic learning.

RQ3: What factors (including demographics, attitudes, and general brain knowledge) influence neuroscience knowledge (general brain knowledge and neuromyth beliefs) and attitudes among pre-service and in-service teachers? H3: The influencing factors of neuroscience knowledge and attitudes may differ between pre-service and in-service teachers, and the relationship between general brain knowledge and neuromyth beliefs will also vary across these two teacher groups.

By addressing these questions and testing these hypotheses, this study aims to provide empirical insights that can inform the development of tailored policies, curricula, and training initiatives to effectively integrate neuroscience concepts into Chinese teacher education.