Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32870076›Full record

ArticleCBE life sciences education2020

Representing Variability: The Case of Life Cycle Diagrams.

David Menendez, Olympia N Mathiaparanam, David Liu, Vienne Seitz, Martha W Alibali, Karl S Rosengren

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CBE life sciences education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

David MenendezDepartment of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, 53706.
Olympia N MathiaparanamDepartment of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, 53706.
David LiuDepartment of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, 53706.
Vienne SeitzDepartment of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, 53706.
Martha W AlibaliDepartment of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, 53706.
Karl S RosengrenDepartment of Psychology and Department of Brain and Cognitive Science, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, 14627.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Two foundational concepts in biology education are 1) offspring are not identical to their parents, and 2) organisms undergo changes throughout their lives. These concepts are included in both international and U.S. curricular standards. Research in psychology has shown that children often have difficulty understanding these concepts, as they are inconsistent with their intuitive theories of the biological world. Additionally, prior research suggests that diagrams are commonly used in instruction and that their features influence student learning. Given this prior work, we explored the characteristics of life cycle diagrams and discuss possible implications for student learning. We examined 75 life cycle diagrams from books, including five biology or general science textbooks and 25 specialized trade books focusing on biology for children. We also examined 633 life cycle diagrams from a publicly available online database of science diagrams. Most diagrams failed to show any within-species variability. Additionally, many diagrams had perceptually rich backgrounds, which prior research suggests might hinder learning. We discuss how the design characteristics of diagrams may reinforce students' intuitive theories of biology, which might make it difficult for students to understand key biological concepts in the future.

Indexed as

Life Cycle StagesAnimalsComprehensionHumansLearningStudents

Identifiers

PMID32870076
PMCPMC8711823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.