So many libraries, so little common sense. Instead of mis-information, let's spread some information.
In the long run, a useful abstraction without documentation creates more work than no abstraction at all. The utility of an abstraction is a function not only of how much simpler it makes the re-factored code, but also of how long it takes the average developer to understand and implement new features based upon it.
If one has to look at the underlying sourcecode for an API in order to understand how to implement something, then the abstraction it provides is merely an additional layer of indirection.
For an abstraction to be worthwhile, it has to gain acceptance by a group of programmers, and make their work more efficient.
RSpec and Rails, two popular libraries, but with very different results. Although RSpec has gained a lot of acceptance in industry, it doesn't make programmers' work any more efficient than a simpler abstraction, such as Minitest. Rails on the other hand, makes programmers' work more efficient, and has gained a lot of acceptance among programmers. The blogging culture surrounding Rails is an example of how this acceptance grew organically.
But why are begginners are drawn to RSpec? Well, as it happens people aren't that good at finding information. Even experienced developers look for blog posts rather than looking at the API documentation, or buying a book. It is easier. But the amount of cheap blog posts about how you can make your Ruby on Rails application better are infused with fear-entrepreneur rhetoric that feeds into programmers' insecurity about their ability to build robust systems.
It turns out you don't need a lot of the test harness shenanigans that a lot of these so called "expert" consultancies talk about in their blogposts. They are riddled with opinion and lacking in real facts. The proof of expertise is often shaky, based on plastering web-pages with logos of big customers. But having a big customer doesn't make you a industry leader!