ArticleCBE life sciences education2009
Analysis of students' aptitude to provide meaning to images that represent cellular components at the molecular level.
Article in CBE life sciences education, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Science Behind G Protein-Coupled Receptors (GPCRs) and Their Accurate Visual Representation in Scientific Research.The Journal of biocommunication · 2017Article
- Physical models have gender-specific effects on student understanding of protein structure-function relationships.Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology · 2016Article
- Education catching up with science: preparing students for three-dimensional literacy in cell biology.CBE life sciences education · 2012Article
- A survey of educational uses of molecular visualization freeware.Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The number of experimentally derived structures of cellular components is rapidly expanding, and this phenomenon is accompanied by the development of a new semiotic system for teaching. The infographic approach is shifting from a schematic toward a more realistic representation of cellular components. By realistic we mean artist-prepared or computer graphic images that closely resemble experimentally derived structures and are characterized by a low level of styling and simplification. This change brings about a new challenge for teachers: designing course instructions that allow students to interpret these images in a meaningful way. To determine how students deal with this change, we designed several image-based, in-course assessments. The images were highly relevant for the cell biology course but did not resemble any of the images in the teaching documents. We asked students to label the cellular components, describe their function, or both. What we learned from these tests is that realistic images, with a higher apparent level of complexity, do not deter students from investigating their meaning. When given a choice, the students do not necessarily choose the most simplified representation, and they were sensitive to functional indications embedded in realistic images.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.