Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35044845›Full record

ArticleCBE life sciences education2022

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

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

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CBE life sciences education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

M Elizabeth BarnesSocial Perceptions of Science Lab, Department of Biology, Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, TN 37132.
Taya MishevaBiology Education Research Lab, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center, School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85282.
K SupriyaBiology Education Research Lab, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center, School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85282.
Michael RutledgeDepartment of Biology, Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, TN 37132.
Sara E BrownellBiology Education Research Lab, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center, School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85282.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hundreds of articles have explored the extent to which individuals accept evolution, and the Measure of Acceptance of the Theory of Evolution (MATE) is the most often used survey. However, research indicates the MATE has limitations, and it has not been updated since its creation more than 20 years ago. In this study, we revised the MATE using information from cognitive interviews with 62 students that revealed response process errors with the original instrument. We found that students answered items on the MATE based on constructs other than their acceptance of evolution, which led to answer choices that did not fully align with their actual acceptance. Students answered items based on their understanding of evolution and the nature of science and different definitions of evolution. We revised items on the MATE, conducted 29 cognitive interviews on the revised version, and administered it to 2881 students in 22 classes. We provide response process validity evidence for the new measure through cognitive interviews with students, structural validity through a Rasch dimensionality analysis, and concurrent validity evidence through correlations with other measures of evolution acceptance. Researchers can now measure student evolution acceptance using this new version of the survey, which we have called the MATE 2.0.

Indexed as

StudentsHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID35044845
PMCPMC9250377

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.