Fostering 21st-Century Evolutionary Reasoning: Teaching Tree Thinking to Introductory Biology Students.

The ability to interpret and reason from Tree of Life (ToL) diagrams has become a vital component of science literacy in the 21st century. This article reports on the effectiveness of a research-based curriculum, including an instructional booklet, laboratory, and lectures, to teach the fundamentals of such tree thinking in an introductory biology class for science majors. We present the results of a study involving 117 undergraduates who received either our new research-based tree-thinking curriculum or business-as-usual instruction.

Linear versus branching depictions of evolutionary history: implications for diagram design.

This article reports the results of an experiment involving 108 college students with varying backgrounds in biology. Subjects answered questions about the evolutionary history of sets of hominid and equine taxa. Each set of taxa was presented in one of three diagrammatic formats: a noncladogenic diagram found in a contemporary biology textbook or a cladogram in either the ladder or tree format.

Inference is bliss: using evolutionary relationship to guide categorical inferences.

Three experiments, adopting an evolutionary biology perspective, investigated subjects' inferences about living things. Subjects were told that different enzymes help regulate cell function in two taxa and asked which enzyme a third taxon most likely uses. Experiment 1 and its follow-up, with college students, used triads involving amphibians, reptiles, and mammals (reptiles and mammals are most closely related evolutionarily) and plants, fungi, and animals (fungi are more closely related to animals than to plants).

Understanding phylogenies in biology: the influence of a Gestalt Perceptual Principle.

Cladograms, hierarchical diagrams depicting evolutionary histories among (groups of) species, are commonly drawn in 2 informationally equivalent formats--tree and ladder. The authors hypothesize that these formats are not computationally equivalent because the Gestalt principle of good continuation obscures the hierarchical structure of ladders. Experimental results confirmed that university students (N = 44) prefer to subdivide ladders in accordance with good continuation rather than with the underlying hierarchical structure.