A Revised Measure of Acceptance of the Theory of Evolution: Introducing the MATE 2.0

Barnes, M. Elizabeth; Misheva, Taya; Supriya, K.; Rutledge, Michael L.; Brownell, Sara E.

doi:10.1187/cbe.21-05-0127

Cited by 13 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In particular, the acceptance of evolution within the scientific community is often accepted by German creationists (Beniermann, 2019); hence, it may fail to be a good indicator for evolution acceptance for this group. Additionally, Barnes and colleagues (2022a) demonstrated that these two items are problematic not only because of the potential acceptance of creationists but also due to uncertainty about the standpoint of the scientific community by the test taker. The evidence for evolutionary theory may be an ambivalent measure for evolution acceptance because creationists in the German context claim that data can be interpreted in different ways, i.e., evolution or creation (Junker & Scherer, 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The difference between the two MATE scales was also identified in previous studies based on correlations with results derived from the GAENE (Metzger et al, 2018; Sbeglia & Nehm, 2018). One reason may be that the scale MATE credibility includes several items for which measuring issues have been suggested, like the mixture of questions on evolution acceptance and religious belief (MATE_14R; Smith et al, 2016; Sya'bandari et al, 2021) or the general reputation of the theory of evolution in the scientific community (MATE_5R and MATE_17R; Barnes et al, 2022a; Beniermann, 2019). This could be a particular problem when addressing creationist samples.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Validity aspects in measuring evolution acceptance: Evidence from surveys of preservice biology teachers and creationists

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past decades, a large body of research has examined students' magnitudes of evolution acceptance and related measurement issues resulting in questions concerning instruments' validity and operationalization. Until now, several studies investigated validity aspects of often‐used evolution acceptance instruments and came to diverging conclusions about instruments' scores comparability. Within the last years, religious identity was identified as a significant predictor for magnitudes of evolution acceptance. However, religious identity can also point to validity issues if aspects of the content under investigation are interpreted differently based on specific religious identity. Additionally, self‐identified creationists could serve as a source of validity evidence due to the assumption that creationists should score lower on an evolution acceptance instrument than groups with more scientifically adequate views. Thus, we aim to provide additional validity evidence for often‐used evolution acceptance instruments within a European context (i.e., Germany) by comparing two groups of particular interest for research in science education: preservice biology teachers and self‐identified creationists. Exploring evidence based on (1) internal structure, (2) relationships with other variables, and (3) test content provides arguments for test interpretations' validity. A total of 286 persons (206 preservice biology teachers and 81 self‐identified creationists) participated in a survey comprised of six often‐used evolution acceptance measures (i.e., MATE, GAENE, I‐SEA, ATEVO, Gallup question, and 100 point questions). Overall, our findings indicate that the six applied instruments demonstrate differences concerning their evidence for sound interpretation. In particular, the DIF and dimensionality analyses lead to the assumption that the GAENE may be multidimensional other than theoretically expected. In general, the multi‐item measures were stronger related to each other than to the general public polls. Using an instrument that differentiates between microevolution and macroevolution is advisable for creationist samples or samples with a remarkable share of creationists' views.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity aspects in measuring evolution acceptance: Evidence from surveys of preservice biology teachers and creationists

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Item G79 ("Humans are descended from other primate species") was based on the well-known instrument “MATE”, keeping the same wording in the revised version [ 8 ] for the statement about humans, revealing difficulties of evolution in 34 countries [ 2 ]. Many studies have shown that when the human species is concerned, opinions about evolution tend to be extreme, with some people considering evolution for all organisms except our species [ 60 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The use of different instruments to measure evolution acceptance could be a cause of conflicting research results. A variety of tests have been proposed, including the Measure of Acceptance of the Theory of Evolution (MATE), which has been widely used for more than 20 years and recently revised [ 8 ], the Inventory of Student Evolution Acceptance (I-SEA) [ 9 ], the Generalized Acceptance of EvolutioN Evaluation (GAENE) [ 10 ], etc. It should be considered that the studies cited above differ in their contexts of comparison in relation to ages, countries, and socioeconomic levels, as well as the number of data collected and measurement statistics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One study was carried out in Brazil, where these religious groups have a growing influence, and tried to establish a direct correlation between the frequency of Pentecostal Christians and the level of rejection of evolution between the students of two high schools [ 33 ]. A written instrument was created, based on a well-known one [ 8 ], and 10 students were invited for semi-structured interviews [ 33 ]. Although no direct correlation was found, the author concluded that religious beliefs are important elements that shape students’ ideas, possibly introducing “constraints that might hinder the understanding of evolutionary theory” [ 33 , p. 63].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Acceptance of evolution by high school students: Is religion the key factor?

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The idea of biological evolution is not accepted by many people around the world, with a large disparity amongst countries. Some factors may act as obstacles to the acceptance of evolution, such as religion, a lack of openness to experience, and not understanding the nature of science. Although the strength of the association between evolution acceptance and non-scientific factors varies among studies, it is often assumed that resistance to evolution is the byproduct of a religious background. Some studies are even more specific and try to associate the acceptance of evolution with precise religious affiliations. We aimed to explore the strength of associations among nationality, religion, and the acceptance of evolution by students using multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) and statistical tools, with nationwide samples from two different countries. Here, we show that wider sociocultural factors predict the acceptance of evolution to a higher degree than a religious background. We carried out two nationwide data collections that allowed us to compare differences in the acceptance of evolution in Italy and Brazil by high school students who declare to belong to the same religion in the two countries. Roman Catholic students showed significant differences between the two countries, and the gap between them was wider than between Catholics and non-Catholic Christians within Brazil. Our conclusions support those who argue that religious affiliation is not the main factor in predicting the level of evolution acceptance. The sociocultural environment and the level of evolutionary knowledge seem to be more important in this regard. These results open up new interpretative perspectives and provide a better understanding of attitudes towards evolution.

show abstract

Using different acceptance measures: The interplay of evolution acceptance, evolution understanding, and religious belief among German preservice biology teachers, secondary school students, and creationists

Fiedler,

Moormann,

Beniermann

2023

Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evolution understanding is often positively connected with magnitudes of evolution acceptance, whereas religiosity mostly interferes negatively. However, comparisons between studies and countries must be treated cautiously due to the diversity of used instruments and samples. This study aims to generate new evidence concerning the interplay of evolution acceptance, evolution understanding, and religious belief by comparing the results of preservice biology teachers, school students, and self‐identified creationists answering several acceptance instruments (i.e., ATEVO, GAENE, I‐SEA, and MATE) while using the same measurement for understanding and belief. Results of our regression analysis indicate that belief and understanding were significant predictors but often diminished after including the interaction term of belief and understanding. When gender is included in the model, this variable is often significant. The interaction term of belief and understanding was only significant for two instruments in the group of school students. For the creationists, gender appeared as the essential term. While relationship patterns of preservice biology teachers seldom seem to be impacted by the choice of acceptance instruments (at least in correlations and regressions using only belief and understanding), this is not true for our school students and creationists. Our findings indicate that the magnitude of understanding may not mutually be the exclusive factor for (non‐)acceptance. Other factors, such as gender or religiosity, might be more prominent in people's attitudes toward (controversial) topics. Our study creates new insights into the interplay of acceptance, understanding, and belief, and we encourage researchers to carefully consider their choice of instruments.

show abstract

A Revised Measure of Acceptance of the Theory of Evolution: Introducing the MATE 2.0

Abstract: An updated version of the most popular survey used to measure student evolution acceptance in education studies, the Measure of Acceptance of the Theory of Evolution (MATE), is provided. Process, structural, and concurrent validity evidence for the new measure, the MATE 2.0, are supplied.

Cited by 13 publications

References 42 publications

Validity aspects in measuring evolution acceptance: Evidence from surveys of preservice biology teachers and creationists

Validity aspects in measuring evolution acceptance: Evidence from surveys of preservice biology teachers and creationists

Acceptance of evolution by high school students: Is religion the key factor?

Using different acceptance measures: The interplay of evolution acceptance, evolution understanding, and religious belief among German preservice biology teachers, secondary school students, and creationists

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About