Abstract

BackgroundCurrent direct Likert measures for evolution acceptance include the MATE, GAENE, and I-SEA. Pros and cons of each of these instruments have been debated, and yet there is a dearth of research teasing out their similarities and differences when they are used together in a single context beyond the fact that their measures tend to be highly correlated. We administered these to 452 college students in non-major biology classes at two research-intensive universities from the Midwestern and Western United States to investigate the measurement properties of the items within these instruments when combined as a single corpus.ResultsFactor analysis using exploratory and confirmatory methods, and Rasch analyses, suggested that a two-dimensional factor structure best describes the corpus of items. Whether the item was positively or negatively worded was the key delimiter in its factor assignment. Examination of the highest loading items on the respective factors indicates that the first factor measures acceptance of the truth of evolution and the second factor measures rejection of incredible ideas about evolution. The correlation of these two factors is 0.73, indicating that they share 53% of their variance with each other. When treated unidimensionally, eleven items exhibited potential misfit with the Rasch model. This number dropped to nine items when the two factors were considered. These items, and implications for future use of the MATE, GAENE, and I-SEA together, are discussed in detail.ConclusionsThis study is the first analysis of the MATE, GAENE, and I-SEA as a single corpus of items, and yet corroborates previous work showing that these instruments yield measures with highly similar quantitative interpretations. This study also corroborates the effect of negative item wording on how college students interpret the item. While this finding can be applied to college-level students taking undergraduate non-majors biology coursework, work with more advanced biology students has demonstrated that this apparent item wording effect tends to disappear as students advance and become more accepting of evolution. We conclude that despite apparent epistemological differences between the MATE, GAENE, and I-SEA, these can be treated as a single set of items measuring a single factor or two factors without significant loss of quantitative interpretability.

Highlights

  • Darwin’s release of On the Origin of Species in 1859 sent a wave of disconcert which surged rapidly across the seas

  • We focus on quantitative measurement of evolution acceptance, which has been pursued with significant interest for over two decades

  • While not all of the items bear this level of similarity, one can reasonably posit that a person agreeing with one statement will tend to agree with other related statements in the corpus regardless of the instrument on which these statements appear. This needs to be tested, and raises two potential lines of inquiry: (1) do the MATE, Inventory of Student Evolution Acceptance (I-SEA), and Generalized Acceptance of Evolution Evaluation (GAENE) get at a similar construct, and (2) how are the items on these instruments similar or different in how they measure evolution acceptance? We explore these lines of inquiry through three questions: 1. What is the dimensionality of the corpus of items provided by the MATE, I-SEA, and GAENE, and how can the dimension(s) be interpreted?

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Darwin’s release of On the Origin of Species in 1859 sent a wave of disconcert which surged rapidly across the seas. According to a Pew Research Center survey reported in Masci (2017), only 62% of United States residents agree that humans have evolved over time, and only half of these state that evolution is the sole reason that humans change. These statistics are even more sobering in Latin America and the Middle East, where less than half of the current citizenry accepts evolution (Masci 2017). We administered these to 452 college students in non-major biology classes at two research-intensive universities from the Midwestern and Western United States to investigate the measurement properties of the items within these instruments when combined as a single corpus

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call