Investigating undergraduate health sciences students’ acceptance of evolution using MATE and GAENE

Metzger, Kelsey J.; Montplaisir, Darian; Haines, David E.; Nickodem, Kyle

doi:10.1186/s12052-018-0084-8

Cited by 23 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 77 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, if these items were administered to science majors or science teachers, participants would likely give consistently high ratings on all of the items, and the apparent two-dimensionality observed in this study may become negligible. This pattern has been observed in a recent study (Metzger et al 2018). At the other end of the spectrum, if these items were administered to a population which held tenacious anti-evolutionary views, the ratings may be consistently low, and the item corpus may also become more unidimensional.…”

Section: Limitations Of This Study and Current Instrumentationsupporting

confidence: 65%

“…The clean two-dimensional factor structure delineated solely by item valence came as a surprise to us. Since this pattern has also come up in previous work on college students taking general education science courses , and to a lesser degree in more advanced students (Metzger et al 2018), we feel it is no coincidence and deserves further exploration and discussion.…”

Section: Limitations Of This Study and Current Instrumentationsupporting

confidence: 53%

“…1), (2) the closeness of the first eigenvalue from PCA on Rasch residuals to 2 for a unidimensional construction (2.11 items of variance), and (3) the moderate relationship between acceptance of truth and rejection of incredible ideas (r = 0.73). In fact Metzger et al (2018) found that much of the apparent two-dimensionality of the MATE found by disappears in more advanced science students. However, deciding not to recognize evolution acceptance as a two-dimensional construct may also result in a missed opportunity-CFA and Rasch analysis demonstrate that a unidimensional construction does not capture the entire story regarding how these three instruments measure evolution acceptance.…”

Section: Parametrizing Evolution Acceptancementioning

confidence: 98%

“…This said, it is difficult to overlook the similarity in structure of the MATE, I-SEA, and GAENE, namely that they comprise Likert items asking participants the extent to which they agree or disagree with a statement about evolution. A recent study was undertaken to tease out differences between the MATE and the GAENE within an undergraduate health sciences context (Metzger et al 2018). Metzger and colleagues found that, while the GAENE shows better fit statistics than the MATE within a confirmatory factor analysis model, the reliability of both instruments is high (r > 0.9 when treated unidimensionally), and agreement between unidimensional MATE and GAENE measures (disattenuated r = 0.9) is high enough to justify that both instruments may generate similar quantitative conclusions within the same study.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A closer look at the items within three measures of evolution acceptance: analysis of the MATE, I-SEA, and GAENE as a single corpus of items

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Current 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. Results: Factor analysis using exploratory and confirmatory methods, and Rasch analyses, suggested that a twodimensional 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. Conclusions: This 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.

show abstract

Section: Limitations Of This Study and Current Instrumentationsupporting

confidence: 65%

Section: Limitations Of This Study and Current Instrumentationsupporting

confidence: 53%

Section: Parametrizing Evolution Acceptancementioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A closer look at the items within three measures of evolution acceptance: analysis of the MATE, I-SEA, and GAENE as a single corpus of items

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Inventory of Student Evolution Acceptance (I-SEA) 29 and Generalized Acceptance of EvolutioN Evalution (GAENE) 30 tools were more recently developed to address concerns with the MATE, and have gained some traction in the evolution education literature as robust measures. A recent study that employed more than one instrument found the correlation between measures may be quite strong 31 . However, ongoing work in measurement of evolution acceptance and associated factors is needed for furthering the field.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution education is a complex landscape

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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

Investigating undergraduate health sciences students’ acceptance of evolution using MATE and GAENE

Cited by 23 publications

References 77 publications

A closer look at the items within three measures of evolution acceptance: analysis of the MATE, I-SEA, and GAENE as a single corpus of items

A closer look at the items within three measures of evolution acceptance: analysis of the MATE, I-SEA, and GAENE as a single corpus of items

Evolution education is a complex landscape

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