Operationalizing science literacy: an experimental analysis of measurement
Operationalizing science literacy: an experimental analysis of measurement
复制标题
DOI：
10.22323/2.19040203
复制
发表时间：
2020-01-01
影响因子：
1.8
通讯作者：
O'Neill, Liane
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
McKasy, Meaghan;Cacciatore, Michael;O'Neill, Liane
科学知识中的不平等越来越受到关注，因此，如何衡量事实科学知识，以及所述测量中的任何不一致性，与科学传播领域极为相关。事实科学知识的不同操作在研究中可互换使用，可能导致受访者之间的知识水平人为可比。在这里，我们提供了在美国进行的一项在线调查（N = 1，530）中嵌入的实验数据，该调查在3分与5分的反应量表上检查了事实科学知识反应的分布。虽然该量表并没有影响总结性知识指数，显着差异出现时，知识项目进行单独分析或分组的基础上，正确的回答是“真”或“假”。“我们的研究结果强调了沟通者在做出操作化决策时考虑知识评估目标的必要性。
Inequalities in scientific knowledge are the subject of increasing attention, so how factual science knowledge is measured, and any inconsistencies in said measurement, is extremely relevant to the field of science communication. Different operationalizations of factual science knowledge are used interchangeably in research, potentially resulting in artificially comparable knowledge levels among respondents. Here, we present data from an experiment embedded in an online survey conducted in the United States (N = 1,530) that examined the distribution of factual science knowledge responses on a 3- vs. 5-point response scale. Though the scale did not impact a summative knowledge index, significant differences emerged when knowledge items were analyzed individually or grouped based on whether the correct response was "true" or "false." Our findings emphasize the necessity for communicators to consider the goals of knowledge assessment when making operationalization decisions.