Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41481862›Full record

ArticleCBE life sciences education2026

Are They Cousins? Exploring University Students' Acceptance of Common Ancestry in Evolution.

Taya Misheva, Kaitlyn N Coburn, Jason R Wiles

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CBE life sciences education, 2026. 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

3 authors.

Taya MishevaDepartment of Biology, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13210.ORCID 0009-0009-1203-2329
Kaitlyn N CoburnDepartment of Biology, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13210.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Efforts to measure student acceptance of evolution have led to the development of several surveys. One persistent challenge has been constructing a survey that accurately characterizes not only students who accept or reject evolution in its entirety, but also those who accept only certain aspects. This study sought to inform these efforts by exploring how students delineate between what they perceive as acceptable versus unacceptable claims of shared ancestry. We conducted semistructured interviews with U.S. university students in which participants were shown pairs of organisms, asked to explain whether they think the two shared a common ancestor, and explain why or why not. We found that 1) most participants accepted common ancestry for closely related species but rejected it for distantly related species, 2) participants frequently rejected common ancestry between terrestrial and aquatic species, citing habitat differences, 3) participants who rejected common ancestry between humans and chimpanzees often expressed acceptance of human microevolution, and 4) participants who later claimed no creationist beliefs displayed views on evolution similar to those of self-described creationists. These findings can inform ongoing efforts to improve the measurement of student evolution acceptance, particularly those measuring both conceptual knowledge and personal assent.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionBiologyStudentsAnimalsFemaleHumansMaleUniversitiesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID41481862
PMCPMC12930261

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.