Skip to main content

Table 3 Relationship between the constructs (listed below) used in studies investigating evolution education in undergraduate students in U.S. institutions

From: A Review of Undergraduate Evolution Education in U.S. Universities: Building a Unifying Framework

Publication and date

U and A

RB and A

I and A

PE and A

RB and U

I and U

PE and U

NS and A

PE and NS

Johnson and Peeples (1987)

       

Yesa (↑NS = ↑A)

 

Bishop and Anderson (1990)

Noa

 

No

   

Noa

  

Scharmann (1990)

     

Noa

   

Demastes et al. (1995)

Noa

 

No

  

Noa

Noa

  

Jensen and Finley (1995)

     

Yesa (I = ↑U)

   

Sinclair et al. (1997)

     

Yesa (I = ↑U)

   

Matthews (2001)

  

Yesa (I = ↑A)

      

Mckeachie et al. (2002)

  

Yes (I = ↑A)

 

Yes (RB = ↓U)

    

Brem et al. (2003)

No

  

Yes (↑PE = ↑A)

  

Yesa (PE = ↑U)

  

Sinatra et al. (2003)

Noa

        

Wilson (2005)

     

Yes (I = ↑U)

   

Ingram and Nelson (2006)

Noa

 

Yesa (I = ↑A)

      

Robbins and Roy (2007)

  

Yes (I = ↑A)

      

Lombrozo et (al. 2008)

 

Yesa (RB = ↓A)

 

Noa

   

Yesa (↑NS = ↑A)

Yesa (↑PE = ↑NS)

Rice et al. (2011)

Yesa (↑U = ↑A)

 

Noa

  

Yesa (I = ↑U)

   
  1. “Yes” indicates that the researchers identified a relationship between two constructs. “No” indicates that they did not identify a relationship. Arrows indicate if the construct increased or decreased due to its relationship with another construct. Constructs measured: acceptance of evolutionary theory (A), understanding of evolutionary theory (U), instruction in evolutionary theory (I), prior exposure to evolutionary theory (PE), religious beliefs (RB), and understanding the nature of science (NS)
  2. aResults were analyzed statistically
Back to article page

Evolution: Education and Outreach

ISSN: 1936-6434

Contact us