Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40901848›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Introducing CACIE: Development of the first Conceptual Assessment of Children's Ideas about Evolution.

Isabell K Adler, Daniela Fiedler, Andrew Shtulman, Ute Harms

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Isabell K AdlerDepartment of Biology Education, IPN - Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8380-8184
Daniela FiedlerDepartment of Biology Education, IPN - Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany.
Andrew ShtulmanDepartment of Psychology, Occidental College, Los Angeles, California, United States of America.
Ute HarmsDepartment of Biology Education, IPN - Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6284-9219

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The theory of evolution is the core theory of the life sciences. However, due to its counterintuitive nature, learners of all ages have difficulties building coherent knowledge about evolution. Researchers propose to facilitate learning about evolution in school by introducing the topic to children at a younger age to foster learners' pre-scientific ideas and prevent the establishment of inaccurate beliefs. However, assessment tools that could be used with young children are still lacking. This article presents the development and psychometric evaluation of the interview-based Conceptual Assessment of Children's Ideas about Evolution (CACIE). The CACIE comprises 20 items about 10 concepts of the evolutionary principles variation, inheritance, and selection. They can be used with six different animal and plant species. The CACIE was tested with 85 children (1) in cross-sectional interviews and (2) in a test-retest design (n = 14). The instrument was developed using an empirically validated theoretical framework, informed by published instruments and interviews, and refined through pilot studies and observations. The assessment showed good agreement between raters and moderate test-retest reliability. The validity evidence for the responses generated by the CACIE is discussed, and guidelines for its use to measure children's ideas about evolution are provided.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionChildChild, PreschoolCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMalePsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID40901848
PMCPMC12407416

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.