Evolutionary Attitudes and Literacy Survey (EALS): Development and Validation of a Short Form

Abstract

The Evolutionary Attitudes and Literacy Survey (EALS) is a multidimensional scale consisting of 16 lower- and 6 higher-order constructs developed to measure the wide array of factors that influence both an individual’s endorsement of and objection to evolutionary theory. Past research has demonstrated the validity and utility of the EALS (Hawley et al., Evol Educ Outreach 4:117–132, 2011); however, the 104-item long-form scale may be excessive for researchers and educators. The present study sought to reduce the number of items in the EALS while maintaining the validity and structure of the long form. For the present study, and following best practices for short-form construction, we surveyed a new sample of several hundred undergraduates from multiple majors and reduced the long form by 40% while maintaining the scale structure and validity. A multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis supported strong factorial invariance across samples, and therefore verified structure and pattern between the six higher-order constructs of the long-form EALS and the EALS short form (EALS-SF). Regression analysis further demonstrated the short form’s validity (i.e., demographics and openness to experience) and replicated previous findings. In the end, the EALS-SF may be a versatile tool that may be used whole or in part for a variety of research areas, including curricular effectiveness of courses on evolution and/or biology.

Rational engagement buffers the effect of conservatism on one's reported relevance of the theory of evolution

“…In other words, individuals who identified as more conservative were less likely to report engaging in rational thought, such as thinking in depth, or enjoy solving problems and intellectual challenges. In addition, the hypothesis that conservatism would be a negative predictor of relevance of evolution was supported, and congruent with previous research (Hawley et al, ; Short & Hawley, ). Individuals who identified as more conservative were less likely to view evolutionary theory relevant in areas including biology, the social sciences, and their everyday life.…”

“…Attitudes central to one's self-concept, like political attitudes, are difficult to change (Pomerantz, Chaiken, & Tordesillas, 1995) and individuals tend to seek information which confirm their already held beliefs (Lord, Ross, & Lepper, 1979). For example, past research has found conservativism to be associated with less reported exposure to evolution, and lower knowledge and relevance of evolution (Hawley, Short, McCune, Osman, & Little, 2011;Short & Hawley, 2012). Researchers and practitioners interested in increasing individual's attitudes toward the relevance of evolution may not be very successful by trying to change individual political attitudes.…”

“…The participant's mean response to five-item relevance of evolutionary theory subscale from EALS-SF (Short & Hawley, 2012) was again used to measure relevance of evolution and demonstrated strong internal consistency (α = .87). Study 2 was an online-study that recruited participants to complete a verbal fluency task.…”

Predictors of evolution acceptance in a museum population

“…The response to this question, therefore, is linked to whether the individual is considering simply Homo sapiens or the entire hominin lineage, thus potentially leading to an answer which indicates a belief in special creation rather than acceptance of human evolution. These faults appear to have minimal impact on our results, but they do suggest that a more extensive instrument of evolutionary acceptance, such as the EALS (Hawley 2011) or the EALS short from (Short and Hawley 2012) can useful in exploring the details of evolutionary acceptance. Whether these rather extensive questionnaires (the long version of the EALS has 104 questions; short version 62) can be effectively employed in a museum context remains to be seen.…”

Biyoloji Öğretmen Adaylarının Evrim Teorisi Hakkındaki Kavram Yanılgıları

“…In their study, Short and Hawley (2012) have found the misconception that evolution would always create a more perfect creature, pointing to a misconception about an evolutionary chain extending from the simpler to the perfect. All these studies in the literature are consistent with the findings of this study.…”