Search results
Dec 14, 2011 · The causes of non-acceptance of evolution are groupable into five categories: inadequate understanding of the empirical evidence and the content of modern evolutionary theory, inadequate understanding of the nature of science, religion, various psychological factors, and political and social factors. This multiplicity of causes is not sufficiently appreciated by many scientists, educators, and ...
- Trust in science and scientists and the acceptance of evolution
Background Accepting the concept of evolution is important...
- Trust in science and scientists and the acceptance of evolution
Jan 18, 2012 · Not surprisingly, and rather unfortunately, religious belief interferes with people's understanding of what the theory of evolution says. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming.
- Results Overview
- Trust in Science and Acceptance of Evolution
- Trust in Science and Acceptance in Evolution Contexts
- Individual Characteristics and Evolution Acceptance
- Demographic Characteristics
- Religiosity, Trust, and Political Orientation
- Isea Subscales
- Structural Equation Model
- Overall Summary of Results
Before we began our analysis we conditioned our data by removing responses from the participants who did not complete all surveys, forward coded reverse phrased items, and removed duplicated answers from the same users. Once conditioned, we determined the Cronbach’s alpha reliability of the instruments we used. The reliability, average scores, and ...
The analysis for our first research question revealed that trust in science and scientists was associated with overall evolution acceptance (β = .57, t(157) = 8.69, p < .001) and that trust in science explained a significant proportion of the variance in overall evolution acceptance (R 2 = .33, F(1,157) = 75.52, p< . 001). Our results indicate that...
Next, for our second research question we examined the relationship between trust in science and the I-SEA subscales. Trust in science was predicative of all three contexts of evolution and accounted for a significant portion of the variance of evolution acceptance (see Table 3).
To determine the answer to our third research question we examined the relationship between evolution acceptance and a number of individual characteristics. To determine if individual differences were related to acceptance of evolution we ran a number of appropriate calculations including correlation, chi-square, and t-tests.
Our analysis revealed no relationship between acceptance of evolution and participant age, gender, ethnicity, community of upbringing, year in college, years of college education, major, number of college level classes, or number of college level biology classes (all p-values were greater than .05).
To determine if religious commitment and political orientation both individually and in combination with trust in science were predictive of evolution acceptance we conducted a number of regression calculations. Our analysis revealed that having lower religious commitment was associated with a greater evolution acceptance. Additionally, having a mo...
Similarly to what was observed for overall evolution acceptance, no significant associations between acceptance of microevolution, macroevolution, or human evolution and any of the demographic variables were observed (p > .05 for all variables). Likewise, having lower religious commitment was associated with a stronger acceptance of the three conte...
We conducted a final level of data analysis by testing a structural equation model (SEM) (Bentler 1995), using our religious commitment, political orientation, and composite average of trust values as independent variables and the composite average for evolution acceptance as the dependent variable. Our analysis revealed all three of the independen...
Both trust in science and religious commitment were predictive of evolution acceptance as well as the contexts of microevolution, macroevolution, and human evolution. Further, political orientation was significantly associated with acceptance of each context of evolution when listed as the only predictor variable or when included in the model with ...
- Louis S Nadelson, Kimberly K Hardy
- 2015
In Figure 1B, we report rates of acceptance of evolution openly and thinking that evolution is definitely true among these three populations, as follows: 63% of the college students, 59% of the educators of prospective teachers, and 94% of the research faculty accept evolution openly; 58% of the college students, 51% of the educators of prospective teachers, and 82% of the research faculty ...
Jul 24, 2018 · The question becomes why, in the face of so much convincing evidence, do people still not accept evolution as a process that occurs to shape the existence of life on this planet? Hypotheses about causes of rejection. The second deficit model based hypothesis is that people reject evolution because they lack scientific reasoning ability.
Science & Society DOI 10.1002/bies.200900082 Belief versus acceptance: Why do people not believe in evolution? James D. Williams* University of Sussex, School of Education, Falmer, Brighton, East Sussex, UK Despite being an established and accepted scientific theory for 150 years, repeated public polls show that evolution is not believed by large numbers of people.
People also ask
Why do people not accept evolution?
Can evolution be understood without acceptance?
Why are scientists unable to explain biological evolution?
Do people believe in evolution?
Is there a decline in the acceptance of evolution?
Is evolution accepted?
Oct 21, 2009 · Introduction. Why people do not believe in evolution has no simple answer. With the creationist community promoting intelligent design as a viable scientific alternative to evolution, coupled with calls for the discussion of ‘strengths and weaknesses’ in evolution in the USA, challenges to evolution have entered a new era. 1 The creationist community is trying to generate a distinction ...
