ArticleJournal of microbiology & biology education2025
Evaluating gains in student self-efficacy in scientific literacy associated with a brief curricular intervention.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Undergraduate research experiences (UREs) are high-impact practices that enhance retention, motivation, and self-efficacy in science, particularly for students with limited prior exposure to scientific environments. However, many students-especially those from underrepresented or marginalized backgrounds-enter these experiences with low research self-efficacy, stemming from limited familiarity with academic language, scientific literature, and research communication. The Research Induction Curriculum (RIC) was designed to address this challenge by providing early, structured training in scientific literacy through scaffolded journal club discussions. The RIC introduces students to progressively more complex scientific articles, supports peer discussion, and builds confidence in reading, interpreting, and presenting scientific information. This study investigates two research questions: (i) how does students' self-perceived self-efficacy in scientific literacy change after completing the RIC? and (ii) are perceptions of these gains dependent on when the assessment is conducted? A total of 91 students in the National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) Enhancing Cross-disciplinary Infrastructure and Training at Oregon (EXITO) program at Portland State University completed surveys either immediately before and after the RIC (prospective pre-post design) or nearly 1 year later (retrospective pre-post design), after participating in mentored research placements. While both groups demonstrated gains in their confidence after participating in the RIC, students assessed retrospectively reported significantly greater confidence gains than those assessed prospectively. This study highlights the benefits of a brief intervention in preparing students for UREs as well as the influence of evaluation timing and authentic research experience on students' perceptions of growth.
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.