ArticleJournal of microbiology & biology education2025
Sketchy understandings: drawings reveal where students may need additional support to understand scale and abstraction in common representations of DNA.
Article in Journal of microbiology & biology education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bad AI-generated images can be good for teaching visual literacy in biology.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2026Article
- Misshaped chromosomes, mismatched chromatids, and missized genes: easy edits may help mitigate misconceptions commonly represented in published scientific figures.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Visual representations in molecular biology tend to follow a set of shared conventions for using certain shapes and symbols to convey information about the size and structure of nucleotides, genes, and chromosomes. Understanding how and why biologists use these conventions to represent DNA is a key part of visual literacy in molecular biology. Visual literacy, which is the ability to read and interpret visual representations, encompasses a set of skills that are necessary for biologists to effectively use models to communicate about molecular structures that cannot be directly observed. To gauge students' visual literacy skills, we conducted semi-structured interviews with undergraduate students who had completed at least a year of biology courses. We asked students to draw and interpret figures of nucleotides, genes, and chromosomes, and we analyzed their drawings for adherence to conventions for representing scale and abstraction. We found that 77% of students made errors in representing scale, and 86% of students made errors in representing abstraction. We also observed that about half of the students in our sample used the conventional shapes and symbols to represent DNA in unconventional ways. These unconventional sketches may signal an incomplete understanding of the structure and function of DNA. Our findings indicate that students may need additional instructional support to interpret the conventions in common representations of DNA. We highlight opportunities for instructors to scaffold visual literacy skills into their teaching to help students better understand visual conventions for representing scale and abstraction in molecular biology.
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.