DOCSLIB.ORG

Thesis Template

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Thesis Template WHY DO WE ARGUE ABOUT SCIENCE? EXPLORING THE PSYCHOLOGICAL ANTECEDENTS OF REJECTION OF SCIENCE JOHN RICHARD KERR A thesis submitted to Victoria University of Wellington for the fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Victoria University of Wellington 2020 Abstract Science is recognised and accepted as an important tool for understanding the world in which we live, yet some people hold beliefs that go against the best available scientific evidence. For example, many people believe human-caused climate change is not occurring, or that vaccines are ineffective and dangerous. Previous research has investigated a range of possible drivers of this ‘rejection of science’ (Lewandowsky, Oberauer, & Gignac, 2013), including ignorance, distrust of scientists, and ideological motivations. The studies in this thesis extend this line of inquiry, focusing first on the role of perceptions of scientific agreement. I report experimental evidence that people base their beliefs on ‘what they think scientists think’ (Study 1). However, an analysis of longitudinal data (Study 2) suggests that our personal beliefs may also skew our perceptions of scientific agreement. While the results of Study 1 and Study 2 somewhat conflict, they do converge on one finding: perceptions of consensus alone do not fully explain rejection of science. In the remainder of the thesis I cast a wider net, examining how ideological beliefs are linked to rejection of science. Study 3 draws on social media data to reveal that political ideology is associated with rejection of science in the context of who people choose to follow on the platform Twitter. A final set of studies (4, 5, and 6) examine the role of two motivational antecedents of political ideology, Right-wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO), in rejection of science across five publicly debated issues. I also explore several potential mediators which might explain these effects. I report, for the first time, that RWA and SDO predict rejection of science across a range of issues and one mediator emerges as a consistent link: distrust of scientists. People who are less opposed to authoritarian (RWA) or hierarchical (SDO) values are less trusting of scientists and, in turn, more likely to reject specific scientific findings. I discuss potential strategies to address or circumvent this ideologically-motivated distrust of science. Taken as whole, this thesis extends our understanding of why people disagree with an established scientific consensus on socially important issues. Knowledge of the scientific consensus matters, but our deeper beliefs about society can also draw us closer to, or push us further from evidence-based conclusions. i Table of Contents Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... i Table of Contents ..................................................................................................................... ii List of Figures ...........................................................................................................................v List of Tables .......................................................................................................................... vi List of Abbreviations ............................................................................................................ viii Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................. ix Chapter 1: Introduction ...................................................................................... 1 1.1 Thesis overview ..............................................................................................................2 Chapter 2: Rejection of Science .......................................................................... 5 2.1 Defining rejection of science ..........................................................................................5 2.2 Scope of thesis ................................................................................................................6 2.3 Examples of rejection of science ....................................................................................6 2.3.1 Climate change .....................................................................................................6 2.3.2 GM food ...............................................................................................................8 2.3.3 Vaccines ...............................................................................................................9 2.3.4 Fluoridation ........................................................................................................10 2.3.5 Evolution ............................................................................................................11 2.4 Importance of investigating rejection of science ..........................................................12 2.5 Summary .......................................................................................................................14 Chapter 3: Why Do People Reject Science? .................................................... 15 3.1 Ignorance ......................................................................................................................15 3.1.1 The Information Deficit Model ..........................................................................15 3.1.2 Awareness of consensus .....................................................................................17 3.1.3 The Gateway Belief Model ................................................................................17 3.2 General attitudes towards science .................................................................................20 3.2.1 Trust in scientists ................................................................................................20 3.3 Motivated reasoning .....................................................................................................22 3.3.1 The Attitude Roots Model ..................................................................................24 3.3.2 Attitude roots: Ideological predictors of rejection of science .............................25 3.3.3 The Dual Process Model: RWA and SDO as distal drivers of rejection of science ................................................................................................................32 3.4 Chapter summary and research questions .....................................................................41 Chapter 4: Investigating the Gateway Belief Model ....................................... 43 4.1 Preface ..........................................................................................................................43 4.2 Study 1: Changes in perceived scientific consensus shift beliefs about climate change and GM food safety ................................................................................................................44 4.2.1 Abstract ..............................................................................................................44 4.2.2 Introduction ........................................................................................................45 4.2.3 Method................................................................................................................50 4.2.4 Results ................................................................................................................52 ii 4.2.5 Discussion ..........................................................................................................59 4.3 Bridging comment ........................................................................................................64 4.4 Study 2: Perceptions of scientific consensus do not predict later beliefs about the reality of climate change: A test of the gateway belief model using cross-lagged panel analysis ....................................................................................................................................64 4.4.1 Abstract ..............................................................................................................64 4.4.2 Introduction ........................................................................................................65 4.4.3 Materials and Methods .......................................................................................66 4.4.4 Results ................................................................................................................67 4.4.5 Discussion ..........................................................................................................68 4.5 General Discussion .......................................................................................................70 Chapter 5: Politics and Science in the New Zealand Twittersphere ............. 73 5.1 Study 3 Preface .............................................................................................................73 5.2 Study 3: Political ideology and rejection of science on twitter. ...................................73 5.2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................73 5.2.2 Method................................................................................................................78 5.2.3 Results ................................................................................................................81
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Feb 2020 February Is Cabin Fever Month
    Like Share Tweet Share this Page: Anthroposophic Medicine for Whole Person Healing & Wellness February, 2020 February is cabin fever month where winter has a strong hold. In Sacramento, it’s spring-like. We will be closed Friday, February 14. Smile, and generously use loving words, and maybe fewer hugs this germy Valentine’s! (See #3 under Coronavirus and watch 'sanitation.') Remember to have your ANNUAL check-in! Stay established with RMT so we are up- to-date if you need help in the time ahead. Our doctor-patient relationship with you is the foundation of your medical exemption – gaps in contact over a year make it look like we do not have an active doctor-patient relationship. Get in front of the calendar and get it done! Combine that with a needed sports physical or vaccine consult to plan the schedule for the safest vaccination possible. Read below about: CORONALikeVIRUS, Share Tweet Share this Page: What to do if you receive a letter from the DEPARTMENT OF INVESTIGATION , Updates on positive movement in LEGISLATION, and REACTIONS TO CALM POWDER. Also, a great free FERMENTATION SUMMIT is underway now-- join! ❤ A Voice for Choice LiveAware Expo is this month!❤ Check out the speakers, including Elana Freeland, author of Under an Ionized Sky: from chemtrails to space fence lockdown. Peaceful days MKS for all of us CORONAVIRUS 1. Prevention: Vit C, Vit A (Carlson cod liver oil), Zinc, Astragalus (if you have autoimmune disease) or Elderberry (for those without autoimmune disease); glycyrrhiza (licorice) helps treat symptoms. (We have high quality versions of these immune strengthening products for you to purchase.) Watch more on this HERE.
    [Show full text]
  • Impacts of a Comprehensive Public Engagement Training and Support Program on Scientists’ Outreach Attitudes and Practices
    International Journal of Science Education, Part B Communication and Public Engagement ISSN: 2154-8455 (Print) 2154-8463 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rsed20 Impacts of a comprehensive public engagement training and support program on scientists’ outreach attitudes and practices Cathlyn Stylinski, Martin Storksdieck, Nicolette Canzoneri, Eve Klein & Anna Johnson To cite this article: Cathlyn Stylinski, Martin Storksdieck, Nicolette Canzoneri, Eve Klein & Anna Johnson (2018): Impacts of a comprehensive public engagement training and support program on scientists’ outreach attitudes and practices, International Journal of Science Education, Part B, DOI: 10.1080/21548455.2018.1506188 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2018.1506188 Published online: 31 Aug 2018. Submit your article to this journal View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rsed20 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION, PART B https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2018.1506188 Impacts of a comprehensive public engagement training and support program on scientists’ outreach attitudes and practices Cathlyn Stylinski a, Martin Storksdieck b, Nicolette Canzonerib, Eve Kleinc and Anna Johnson c aUMCES, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science Appalachian Laboratory, Frostburg, MD, USA; bCenter for Research on Lifelong STEM Learning, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA; cInstitute for Learning Innovation, Seattle, WA, USA ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY Scientists are increasingly being called upon to play a more prominent role Received 1 November 2017 in the interface of science and society by contributing to science literacy in Accepted 24 July 2018 ways that support two-way exchanges with the public.
    [Show full text]
  • THE INDY STEM TEACHER RESIDENCY PROGRAM: a Teacher Quality Partnership Between Indianapolis Public Schools and Purdue University
    Table of Contents QUALITY OF THE PROJECT DESIGN 1-29 1.Extent to which the proposed project demonstrates a rationale 3-7 (a) Needs Assessment data 4-6 AppC (b) Project will prepare teachers with strong teaching skills 1-29 2.Goals, objectives, and outcomes are clearly specified and measurable 42-44 3.Project is designed to build capacity / yield results that extend beyond project period 29 4.Project represents exceptional approach for meeting statutory purposes/requirements 1-29 (c) Program will prepare teachers to understand/use research data to improve instruction 1-29 (f5i) Program aligns with state early learning standards… 1-29 ADEQUACY OF RESOURCES 29-33 1. Adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment, supplies, and other resources 29-33 (e1) Assessment describing resources, including integration of funds from other sources 29-33 (e2) Assessment that describes the intended use of the grant funds 33 2. Relevance/demonstrated commitment of partners to project implementation/success 33 (e3) Commitment of resources and to the continuation of activities when the grant ends 29-33 QUALITY OF MANAGEMENT PLAN 33-41 1. Adequacy of management plan to achieve objectives on time/within budget, 33-39, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for AppJ accomplishing tasks (d1) Coordination of strategies/activities with funded teacher preparation or PD prog 13 (d2) How activities are consistent with State, local, and other education reform activities 8, 18- 19,21- that promote teacher quality and student academic
    [Show full text]
  • Discrimination and Harassment
    Dear Member of the Legislature - My name is April Groom and I am in District 54. I am a mom of a child with multiple food allergies and sensitivities and I’m concerned that if this bill passes, it will be extremely hard to get a medical exemption. I’m also concerned because my son is on an IEP. Per the law of his IEP, I believe this would be discrimination and harassment. Please oppose HB 3063. Pease read the attached letter from my 9-year-old, from District 54, who's goal it is in school this year to Be a Better writer! He has an IEP. This letter was a 2-day labor of love. We are concerned he would Be denied a puBlic education if this Bill passes and per his IEP, we feel he would Be discriminated against. His letter is attached in this email and it is also copied here fully (he got tired of writing and shortened it), included in my first point of concern, Below titled: Civil Rights/Discrimination. HB 3063 is an infringement on our right to bodily autonomy and informed consent. The US Supreme Court has ruled vaccines as 'unavoidably unsafe' and where there is risk, there must Be choice. Each and every vaccine insert for each and every vaccine lists "Death" as a possible outcome. See my 8 points of concern, listed numerically, with supporting factors, below: As a mom and a citizen of the state of Oregon, and we as parents, I am concerned aBout the following 8 points, regarding HB3063: 1).Civil Rights/ Discrimination 2).
    [Show full text]
  • 04 Winter Issue
    Winter 2004 ewsletter Vaccination Risk Awareness Network Inc. SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME OR SCURVY? INSIDE THIS ISSUE page By C. Alan B. Clemetson, M.D. 1 - Shaken Baby Syndrome or There has undoubtedly been a grave also jaundice, which was still evident Scurvy miscarriage of justice in the conviction four weeks after leaving hospital. His 1 - Pushing the Vaccine Agenda of Alan Yurko of Orlando, Florida, health was further impaired when he 3 - VRAN News who was accused of “shaken baby syn- received six inoculations (for diphthe- drome” and was sentenced to life ria, whooping cough, tetanus, influen- 13 - Archie Kalokerinos, MD imprisonment for murder. The error za B, oral polio vaccine, and hepatitis 15 - Rubella Vaccination seems to have arisen because of fash- B at eight weeks of age. 18 - Rubella in Babies & ionable adherence to a diagnosis now Actually, the autopsy findings of Pregnant Women in vogue, and from a desire to blame subdural hemorrhage, four broken one single preventable occurrence for ribs, severe anemia, and a few bruises 21 - Vaccines & Autism - IOM an infant death. Everything is supposed are characteristic of Barlow’s disease, Testimonies to be preventable nowadays. or infantile scurvy, but that diagnosis 25 - Letters Surely Alan held his 10-week-old son went out of fashion many years ago, so 31 - Dr. McCandless - Autism by the heels and slapped him on the no blood analysis for vitamin C or for bottom after he began wheezing, spat histamine was conducted. The prosecu- 31 - Chicken Pox & Shingles up, and stopped breathing, but he did tors suspected both parents, but 33 - Newsclips not cause his son’s death: he was trying Francine Yurko refused to implicate to resuscitate him.
    [Show full text]
  • John Andrew Higgins
    John Andrew Higgins Assistant Professor Princeton University Tel: 609-258-7024 Department of Geosciences Fax: 609-258-5275 212 Guyot Hall Email: [email protected] Princeton, NJ, 08544 Web: carboncycle.princeton.edu Education: 2003-2009 Harvard University, Cambridge, MA Ph.D. in Earth and Planetary Sciences, June 2009 Dissertation Supervisor: Daniel P. Schrag 2002-2003 University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK M.Phil. in Earth Science, August 2003 Dissertation Supervisor: Harry Elderfield 1998-2002 Harvard College, Cambridge, MA A.B. in Earth and Planetary Sciences (Summa Cum Laude), June 2002 Employment: 2018-present Associate Professor, Department of Geosciences, Princeton University 2012-2018 Assistant Professor, Department of Geosciences, Princeton University 2011-2012 Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIfAR) Junior Fellow 2009-2011 Hess Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Geosciences, Princeton University 2003-2009 Graduate Research Assistant, Department of Earth and Planetary Science, Harvard University Fellowships and Awards: 2011-2013 Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIfAR) Global Scholars Program 2009-2011 Hess Postdoctoral Fellow, Princeton University 2007-2009 National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship 2004-2007 National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate (NDSEG) Fellowship 2002-2003 Henry Fellowship to the University of Cambridge 2002 Phi Beta Kappa, Harvard College Research Interests: Interactions between Earth's climate, life, and the global geochemical cycles of carbon and oxygen on timescales of millennia to billions of years using measurements of the chemistry and isotopic composition of cations in sedimentary rocks and bubbles of trapped air in polar ice cores. Higgins - CV 1 Publications: *Lab -affiliated graduate student or postdoctoral fellow **First author or co-first author manuscripts In Review: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Whole Life Expo 2016 Exhibitor List
    Search this website Expo Blog & Videos 2016 Exhibitors 2016 Speakers 2016 Showguide Special Features Show Hours Buy Tickets Whole Life Expo 2016 Exhibitor List Directions to Convention Centre Over 200 dynamic exhibits feature the latest in natural health and green living products, services and research. Find out what's new for your mind, body and soul. Public Transit SPONSORS EDUCATION, ASSOCIATIONS, ORGANIZATIONS Accessibility GREEN LIVING RESOURCES HEALTH SERVICES, CENTRES, TREATMENTS Contact Us HEALTH PRODUCTS, APPLIANCES, TOOLS ANTI-AGING, SKIN & BODY CARE, AROMATHERAPY Previous Years WHOLE FOODS & ORGANIC MARKET Speakers/Exhibitors COUNSELLING, PERSONAL GROWTH & HEALTHY CUISINES, JUICES, SNACKS AND RETREATS Home GOURMET ITEMS HEALING JEWELLERY & STONES, CRAFTS, ECO- VITAMINS, HERBS, TONICS AND SUPPLEMENTS CLOTHING HEALTHY PET RESOURCES BOOKS, MAGAZINES, MUSIC, MEDIA SPONSORS CANADIAN HEALTH FOOD ASSOCIATION Booth 233 Food Lounge Sponsor www.chfa.ca VITALITY MAGAZINE Booth 60 The Trusted Source for Natural Health Solutions www.vitalitymagazine.com Back to top HEALTH PRODUCTS, APPLIANCES, TOOLS AQUASMART TECHNOLOGIES INC Booth 4 Water Purification Systems AROMAFRESH Booth 140 Ecological Air-Freshener; Hyper-allergenic Odour Neutralizer BIOTRONIX RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS Booth 44 Oxygen Portable Sauna; Gold and Silver Products; Bio Plasmic Generators; Laser; Food Zappers and Testers CENTURION Booth 26,27 Innovative Medical Equipment for Humans and Animals; PEMF; Laser Therapy DORMIO ORGANIC BEDS Booth 50, 51 Organic Mattresses EPHRA KAY
    [Show full text]
  • Rendering Supernova Remnant Cassiopeia a Into Virtual Reality
    Walking Through an Exploded Star: Rendering Supernova Remnant Cassiopeia A into Virtual Reality 1 2 1 1 2 1 Arcand, K.K. , Jiang, E. , Price, S. , Watzke, M. , Sgouros, T. , Edmonds, P. 1 2 ( Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory/Chandra X-ray Observatory, Brown University) ABSTRACT: NASA and other astrophysical data of the Cassiopeia A supernova remnant have been rendered into a three-dimensional virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) program, the first of its kind. This data-driven experience of a supernova remnant allows viewers to “walk” inside the leftovers from the explosion of a massive star, select the parts of the supernova remnant to engage with, and access descriptive texts on what the materials are. The basis of this program is a unique 3D model of the 340- year old remains of a stellar explosion, made by combining data from NASA’s Chandra X-ray Observatory, Spitzer Space Telescope, and ground-based facilities. A collaboration between the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory and Brown University allowed the 3D astronomical data collected on Cassiopeia A to be featured in the VR/AR program - an innovation in digital technologies with public, education, and research-based impacts. Key Words: data, virtual reality, science communication, visualization, augmented reality, narrative 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Overview of Virtual Reality (VR) Virtual Reality (VR) is computer technology that simulates a user's physical presence in a virtual environment. (VR’s close relative, Augmented Reality (AR), adds elements, such as text, overlays and audio, to enhance that experience with sensory input and is briefly discussed in section 1.3).
    [Show full text]
  • Annenberg Science Media Monitor – Report 3
    ANNENBERG SCIENCE MEDIA MONITOR – REPORT 3 How the Media Frame News Stories About Retractions of Scientific Findings Introduction The third report of the Annenberg Science Media Monitor focuses on news coverage of three high- profile retracted scientific findings. Our analysis examines reporting on withdrawn research by four authors: Miguel Ángel Martínez González, whose paper, “Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease with a Mediterranean Diet,” was published in February 2013 in The New England Journal of Medicine; Oona Lönnstedt and Peter Eklöv, whose paper, “Environmentally relevant concentrations of microplastic particles influence larval fish ecology,” was published in June 2016 in Science; Brian Wansink, who has had a number of papers on human eating behavior retracted, including “Bad popcorn in big buckets: portion size can influence intake as much as taste,” published in September 2005 in The Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior. News pieces about retractions treat those due to unintended error differently than those withdrawn for malfeasance or fraud. Here we examine one of the former and two of the latter. Reports on the Lönnstedt-Eklöv study and on Wansink’s withdrawn work adopted the counterfeit quest narrative, while coverage of the Mediterranean diet attributed the retractions to researcher error rather than intentional deception. Articles covering retractions often employ the counterfeit quest narrative, in which storylines chronicle the activities of a deceptive researcher who has gulled custodians of knowledge, such as journal editors and peer reviewers. Our analysis shows that, in general, counterfeit quest narratives report the circumstances leading to retractions, how errors or misconduct were uncovered, and the individuals who identified the issues, but fail to explain how retractions are evidence of the self-corrective norm of science in action.
    [Show full text]
  • Toronto Public Health's Strategy to Address Vaccine Hesitancy
    HL9.2.59 From: Miller, Christine To: Board of Health Subject: Simcoe Muskoka District Health Unit Comments for 2019.HL9.2 on September 23, 2019 Board of Health Date: September 20, 2019 4:16:32 PM Attachments: image001.png image007.png image008.png image009.png Scoping Review_Vaccine Injury Compensation_Dec2017.pdf Sent on behalf of Dr. Charles Gardner, Medical Officer of Health for the Simcoe Muskoka District Health Unit To the City Clerk: Please add my comments to the agenda for the September 23, 2019 Board of Health meeting on item 2019.HL9.2, Moving to Acceptance: Toronto Public Health's Strategy to Address Vaccine Hesitancy I understand that my comments and the personal information in this email will form part of the public record and that my name will be listed as a correspondent on agendas and minutes of City Council or its committees. Also, I understand that agendas and minutes are posted online and my name may be indexed by search engines like Google. Comments: In 2017, the Simcoe Muskoka District Health Unit completed a comprehensive review on the subject of Vaccine Injury Compensation. The review was titled “A Scoping Review on Vaccine- Injury Compensation: Understanding Canadian Immunization Policy” (attached) and the purpose of this paper was to document information on the current dialogue on vaccine-injury compensation, in addition to an exploration of how and why this issue is relevant to supporting current and future immunization efforts in Canada. We ascertained the following key points through our review: · Vaccine Injury Compensation (VIC) dialogues has ebbed and flowed since the early 1980s, and continues to linger across the provinces/territories, which includes public advocacy.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical and Scientific Perspectives on the Health of Canada's First
    HISTORICAL AND SCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVES ON THE HEALTH OF CANADA‟S FIRST PEOPLES March, 2007 Raymond Obomsawin Ph.D. About the Author: Raymond Obomsawin, is of Oneida and Abenaki ancestry. He is a member of the Odanak First Nation based in eastern Canada. The name Obomsawin is derived from the word nobomsawino which means to scout ahead and clear the way. He has previously served as: founding Chairman of the NIB/AFN‟s National Commission Inquiry on Indian Health (Ottawa, Ontario); Executive Director of the California Rural Indian Health Board (Ukiah Programme); Manager of Overseas Operations for CUSO, (Canada's largest international development NGO); and Senior Advisor on Indigenous Knowledge Systems to the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA). In the early 1990s he successfully organized and spearheaded the first public sector funded field review on Indigenous culture-based knowledge systems in development, covering all developing regions of the world. He can be contacted at: [email protected] ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction SECTION I. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………........................... 1 1.1 THE FORGOTTEN LEGACY OF CANADA’S FIRST PEOPLES………………….…..…. 2 1.2 LOSS OF THE GREAT LEGACY OF HEALTH…………………………..……..…...….. 7 1.3 THE POPULARIZED CONCEPT OF “VIRGIN SOILS” RECONSIDERED…………..…… 9 1.4 TWENTIETH & TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY HEALTH CONDITIONS…………..……... 12 1.5 TRADITIONAL FOODS, HEALTH & DISEASE AMONG THE INUIT………………..….. 13 1.6 BACKGROUND ON AND HEALTH CONDITIONS AMONG THE MÉTIS……………..…. 15 1.7 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF MEDICAL SERVICES TO CANADA’S FIRST PEOPLES…. 16 1.8 HEALTH SERVICES FOR THE MÉTIS…………………………………………………. 19 1.9 TRANSFER OF PUBLIC SECTOR HEALTH SERVICES TO ABORIGINAL CONTROL…… 21 1.10 INTERMINABLE ABORIGINAL COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURAL DEFICIENCIES….
    [Show full text]
  • Challenges in Biology Education Research
    Challenges in Biology Education Research Challenges in Biology Education Research – Challenges in Biology This volume consists of 24 original papers related to biology education research. The papers were first presented at the 11th Conference of Eu- ropean Researchers in Didactics of Biology (ERIDOB) organized by the Education Research Academic Committee of ERIDOB and the Centre of Science, Mathema- tics and Engineering Education Research (SMEER) at Karlstad University in Sweden. The conference took place on 5-9 September 2016 with 165 Edited by Niklas Gericke and Marcus Grace participants representing 24 countries. There were 77 oral presentations, including four symposia, and 52 poster presentations. After the conference the presenters were asked to send in extended papers, which all then went through a rigorous peer review process and these 24 were selected for this volume. They are presented in section one. The theme for the 11th ERIDOB conference was Challenges of Biology Education Research – the same as the title of this book of collected pa- pers, and a panel debate around this issue was arranged with William Niklas Gericke and Marcus Grace McComas as organizer. Included in the debate were contributions from seven scholars in the field of biology education research representing se- ven countries from four continents. In section two of this volume, we in- clude the peer-reviewed versions of these short papers as a joint article commenting on the current challenges, trajectories and opportunities for biology education. We hope that this volume will find its way to biology educators as well as biology education researchers and make a useful contribution to the deve- lopment of biology education in Europe and around the world.
    [Show full text]