Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41031818›Full record

ArticleJournal of microbiology & biology education2025

The illusion of inclusion: structural and methodological gaps in biology education research.

Candice Idlebird, Rebecca Campbell-Montalvo, Gary S McDowell, Emily Blosser, Richard Harvey, Yiwen Zha, Jana Marcette

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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. 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

7 authors.

Candice IdlebirdDepartment of Social Sciences, Claflin University, Orangeburg, South Carolina, USA.ORCID 0009-0005-5436-6336
Rebecca Campbell-MontalvoNeag School of Education, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut, USA.
Gary S McDowellLightoller LLC, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Emily BlosserDepartment of Sociology, Anthropology, and Human Development & Family Science, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, Lafayette, Louisiana, USA.
Richard HarveyDepartment of Psychology, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
Yiwen ZhaIndependent Researcher, Tampa, Florida, USA.ORCID 0009-0005-5359-1400
Jana MarcetteDivision of Academic Affairs, Montana State University Billings, Billings, Montana, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This integrative literature review analyzes the corpus of biology education research published in the main biology education journals of major professional societies. The goal of this analysis is to determine which approaches (including groups of focus, research methods, and settings/perspectives) from social science fields (i.e., psychology, sociology, and anthropology) are utilized in published peer-reviewed biology education research relating to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Scoping how social science approaches are used in this area is important to understanding whether biology education research could benefit from complementary approaches that might advance praxis. This analysis found that research informing the biology education community draws heavily from psychological perspectives that are overwhelmingly not disaggregated (78% of articles identifying a group lumped the participant together), are by far more quantitative (58% used survey, 26% grades, 20% school data) than qualitative (17% used interview, 10% observation), and did not adopt structural approaches (72%). The addition of missing contributions from social science is critical to advancing interventions to broaden STEM participation, given that merging paradigms can offer more robust, multi-level explanations for observed phenomena. This has important implications for education, biology education, biology education research, social science, and research in related STEM fields.

Indexed as

biology education researchresearch method

Identifiers

PMID41031818
PMCPMC12687639

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.