2008
DOI: 10.1007/s12052-008-0096-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessment of Biology Majors’ Versus Nonmajors’ Views on Evolution, Creationism, and Intelligent Design

Abstract: The controversy around evolution, creationism, and intelligent design resides in a historical struggle between scientific knowledge and popular belief. Four hundred seventy-six students (biology majors n=237, nonmajors n=239) at a secular liberal arts private university in Northeastern United States responded to a five-question survey to assess their views about: (1) evolution, creationism, and intelligent design in the science class; (2) students’ attitudes toward evolution; (3) students’ position about the t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

5
38
0
1

Year Published

2009
2009
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
5
38
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Comparing students who are biology majors to non-biology majors would also be a useful analysis because students' views of ID and evolution is likely to vary based on the material they were exposed to in their coursework. This relationship is supported by the literature cited during the discussion of the "exposure to evolution" variables, and there are other studies that found students with different majors view evolution and science differently (Gogolin and Swartz 1992;Paz-y-Mino and Espinosa 2009a;Wilson 2001). Unfortunately, as noted earlier, the sample was comprised almost entirely of nonbiology majors, so these analyses could not be conducted.…”
Section: Additional Variablessupporting
confidence: 56%
“…Comparing students who are biology majors to non-biology majors would also be a useful analysis because students' views of ID and evolution is likely to vary based on the material they were exposed to in their coursework. This relationship is supported by the literature cited during the discussion of the "exposure to evolution" variables, and there are other studies that found students with different majors view evolution and science differently (Gogolin and Swartz 1992;Paz-y-Mino and Espinosa 2009a;Wilson 2001). Unfortunately, as noted earlier, the sample was comprised almost entirely of nonbiology majors, so these analyses could not be conducted.…”
Section: Additional Variablessupporting
confidence: 56%
“…However, a review of studies investigating evolution acceptance among undergraduate students (see Additional file 1: Table S1) suggests low rates of acceptance of evolution, even among the STEM student population (Blackwell et al 2003;Rutledge and Sadler 2007). These studies also suggest a positive relationship between understanding science and acceptance of evolution (Fuerst 1984;Lombrozo et al 2008), and a negative relationship between religiosity and acceptance of evolution (Lombrozo et al 2008;Bailey et al 2011;Paz-y-Minos and Espinosa 2009a;Paz-y-Miño and Espinosa 2011;Rissler et al 2014). A recent study suggests that religiosity is even more important factor than education (Rissler et al 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The concept of evolution provides naturalistic explanations about the origin of life, its diversification and biogeography, and the synergistic phenomena resulting from the interaction between life and the environment (Paz-y-Miño C. and Espinosa 2009a, b); mutations, gene flow, genetic drift, and natural selection shape life’s biological processes in Earth’s ecosystems (Mayr 2001). Since the publication of The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin, in 1859, Darwinian evolution has been scrutinized experimentally; today the theory of evolution is widely accepted by the scientific community (Coyne 2009; Dawkins 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In contrast, creationism, theistic evolution, creation science, or young-earth creationism (Petto and Godfrey 2007; Matzke 2010; Phy-Olsen 2010) rely on supernatural causation to explain the origin of the universe and life. These views are not recognized by scientists as evidence-based explanations of cosmic processes (Padian 2009; Scott 2009; Paz-y-Miño C. and Espinosa 2009a, b). …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%