A multifactorial analysis of acceptance of evolution

Abstract

Background: Despite decades of education reform efforts, the percent of the general US population accepting biological evolution as the explanation for the diversity of life has remained relatively unchanged over the past 35 years. Previous work has shown the importance of both educational and non-educational (sociodemographic and psychological) factors on acceptance of evolution, but has often looked at such factors in isolation. Our study is among the first attempts to model quantitatively how the unique influences of evolutionary content knowledge, religiosity, epistemological sophistication, and an understanding of the nature of science collectively predict an individual's acceptance or rejection of evolution.Results: Our study population had a high acceptance of evolution, with an average score of 77.17 (95% C.I. ± 1.483) on the Measure of Acceptance of the Theory of Evolution (MATE) instrument. Our combined general linear model showed that, of the variables in our model, an understanding of the nature of science explained the greatest amount of variation in acceptance of evolution. This was followed in amount of variance explained by a measure of religiosity, openness to experience, religious denomination, number of biology courses previously taken, and knowledge of evolutionary biology terms. Conclusions:Understanding of the nature of science was the single most important factor associated with acceptance of evolution in our study and explained at least four times more variation than measures of evolutionary knowledge. This suggests that educational efforts to impact evolutionary acceptance should focus on increasing an understanding of the nature of science (which may be expected to have additional benefits towards generalized science denial). Additionally, our measure of epistemological sophistication had a unique, significant impact on acceptance of evolution. Both epistemological sophistication and an understanding of the nature of science are factors that might change throughout a liberal arts education, independent of the effect of direct evolutionary instruction.

Changes in Acceptance of Evolution and Associated Factors during a Year of Introductory Biology: The Shifting Impacts of Biology Knowledge, Politics, Religion, Demographics, and Understandings of the Nature of Science

“…Women are in the majority. This representation is a common feature of studies that utilize a 394 college undergraduate population, and is very similar to our previous study conducted at a 395 different university (Dunk et al, 2017). Students in this study tended to have a high level of 396 acceptance of evolution at the start of the fall semester, which is also similar to other studies of 397 ours, both at this university (Carter & Wiles, 2014) and elsewhere (Dunk et al, 2017).…”

“…Though previous research has tended to find no significant relationship between race or ethnicity 127 and evolution acceptance (Dorner, 2016;Nadelson & Hardy, 2015;Woods & Scharmann, 2001), 128 we feel it is important to include and continue to study, especially in light of Walls' (2016, p.1) 129 challenge for racially inclusive science education: "science education research aimed at 130 improving an individual's science learning and understanding necessarily must take into account 131 the background and experiences that could impact the success of such an undertaking." 132 Our prior work was among the first studies to combine most of these factors into a single 133 working model (Dunk, Petto, Wiles, & Campbell, 2017). In a midwestern public university 134 setting, we found student understanding of the nature of science to be the most significant factor 135 in our model, explaining over 13% of the unique variation in acceptance of evolution.…”

“…This study seeks to test two general hypotheses: (i) that when certain variables shown to be 154 related to acceptance of evolution change over time, that change is correlated with change in 155 acceptance of evolution, and (ii) that the amount of variance in acceptance of evolution 156 explained by these variables changes as students progress in knowledge and experience. 157 Specifically, given the previous significant impact on evolution acceptance demonstrated by an 158 understanding of the nature of science, religiosity, openness to experience, and measures of 159 knowledge of evolution (Dunk et al, 2017), we expected to find that changes in these variables 160 would be significantly correlated with changes in evolution acceptance. We expected the 161 direction of these relationships to be positive for nature of science understanding, evolution 162 knowledge measures, and openness to experience (individuals who increase in these variables 163 over time will tend to increase in acceptance of evolution) and negative for intrinsic religiosity 164 (individuals who increase in their intrinsic religiosity will tend to decrease in acceptance of 165 evolution).…”

Using Nonfiction Narratives in an English Course to Teach the Nature of Science and Its Importance to Communicating About Science

“…Once students pass over it, the doorway opens up a new way of thinking and processing, making the study and conduct of science easier and enabling a deeper level of understanding and making connections. Dunk et al (21) found that, of education-related factors, instruction and understanding of NOS have the greatest impact on students’ acceptance of evolution. It was the understanding of scientific thinking that seemed to change students’ minds.…”

Evolutionary remnants as widely accessible evidence for evolution: the structure of the argument for application to evolution education

“…As Shtulman (2006) notes, this may not be a deeplyconsidered response, because "those who do not endorse the claim that Darwin's theory of evolution has been well supported by evidence tend to endorse the alternative claim (i.e., that Darwin's theory of evolution has not been well supported by evidence) rather than plead ignorance". Furthermore, lack of knowledge of the evidence for evolution is clearly not necessarily the only, or even the most important, reason for lack of acceptance of evolution (Allmon 2011;Shtulman 2011;Nadelson 2012, 2013;Rosengren et al 2012;Dunk et al 2017). …”