Search for: All records

Our technological, information-rich society thrives because of scientific thinking. However, a comprehensive theory of the development of scientific thinking remains elusive. Building on previous theoretical and empirical work in conceptual change, the role of credibility and plausibility in evaluating scientific evidence and claims, science engagement, active learning in STEM education, and the development of empirical thinking, we chart a pathway toward a comprehensive theory of the development of scientific thinking as an example of theory building in action. We detail the structural similarity and progressive transformation of our models and perspectives, highlighting factors for incorporation into a novel theory. This theory will focus on beneficial outcomes of a more collaborative scientific community and increasing scientific literacy through deeper science understanding for all people. 

Misinformation around scientific issues is rampant on social media platforms, raising concerns among educators and science communicators. A variety of approaches have been explored to confront this growing threat to science literacy. For example, refutations have been used both proactively as warning labels and in attempts to inoculate against misconceptions, and retroactively to debunk misconceptions and rebut science denialism. Refutations have been used by policy makers and scientists when communicating with the general public, yet little is known about their effectiveness or consequences. Given the interest in refutational approaches, we conducted a comprehensive, pre-registered meta-analysis comparing the effect of refutation texts to non-refutation texts on individuals’ misconceptions about scientific information. We selected 71 articles (53 published and 18 unpublished) that described 76 studies, 111 samples, and 294 effect sizes. We also examined 26 moderators. Overall, our findings show a consistent and statistically significant advantage of refutation texts over non-refutation texts in controlled experiments confronting scientific misconceptions. We also found that moderators neither enhanced nor diminished the impact of the refutation texts. We discuss the implications of using refutations in formal and informal science learning contexts and in science communications from three theoretical perspectives. 

The evolution education experiences of students of color represent an emerging area of research, because past inquiries indicate these students have differential outcomes, such as lower evolution acceptance and severe underrepresentation in evolutionary biology. Religion is often an important support for students of color who are navigating a science, technology, engineering, and mathematics culture that privileges White nonreligious students. For instance, religion helps mitigate the negative effects of racism, but religious students are also more likely to experience conflict when learning evolution. In this nationwide study, we examined the extent to which strong religiosity among students of color can explain their lower evolution acceptance. We surveyed students in 77 college biology courses across 17 states and found that Black/African American students tend to be more religious and less accepting of evolution than any other racial/ethnic identity group and that Hispanic students tend to be slightly more religious and slightly less accepting of evolution than White students. Importantly, we find that religious background is an important factor associated with Black and Hispanic students’ lower levels of evolution acceptance. This study suggests that the biology community should become more inclusive of Christian religious students if it wishes to foster inclusive evolution education for Black and Hispanic students. 

Although many scientists agree that evolution does not make claims about God/god(s), students might assume that evolution is atheistic, and this may lead to lower evolution acceptance. In study 1, we surveyed 1081 college biology students at one university about their religiosity and evolution acceptance and asked what religious ideas someone would have to reject if that person were to accept evolution. Approximately half of students wrote that a person cannot believe in God/religion and accept evolution, indicating that these students may have atheistic perceptions of evolution. Religiosity was not related to whether a student wrote that evolution is atheistic, but writing that evolution is atheistic was associated with lower evolution acceptance among the more religious students. In study 2, we collected data from 1898 students in eight states in the United States using a closed-ended survey. We found that 56.5% of students perceived that evolution is atheistic even when they were given the option to choose an agnostic perception of evolution. Further, among the most religious students, those who thought evolution is atheistic were less accepting of evolution, less comfortable learning evolution, and perceived greater conflict between their personal religious beliefs and evolution than those who thought evolution is agnostic.