Measuring science or religion? A measurement analysis of the National Science Foundation sponsored science literacy scale 2006–2010

High scientific literacy is widely considered a public good. Methods of assessing public scientific knowledge or literacy are equally important. In an effort to measure lay scientific literacy in the United States, the National Science Foundation (NSF) science literacy scale has been a part of the last three waves of the General Social Survey. However, there has been debate over the validity of some survey items as indicators of science knowledge. While many researchers treat the NSF science scale as measuring a single dimension, previous work (Bann and Schwerin, 2004; Miller, 1998, 2004) suggests a bidimensional structure. This paper hypothesizes and tests a new measurement model for the NSF science knowledge scale and finds that two items about evolution and the big bang are more measures of a religious belief dimension termed “Young Earth Worldview” than they are measures of scientific knowledge. Results are replicated in seven samples.

[1]  C. Su,et al.  Domain structures in quantum graphity , 2012, 1203.5367.

[2]  John H. Evans.  Epistemological and Moral Conflict Between Religion and Science , 2011 .

[3]  G. Gauchat.  The cultural authority of science: Public trust and acceptance of organized science , 2011, Public understanding of science.

[4]  M. Musick,et al.  Does Conservative Protestantism Moderate the Association Between Corporal Punishment and Child Outcomes , 2011 .

[5]  Kenneth A. Bollen,et al.  Two Rules of Identification for Structural Equation Models , 2009 .

[6]  Martin W. Bauer,et al.  What can we learn from 25 years of PUS survey research? Liberating and expanding the agenda , 2007 .

[7]  Jon D. Miller.  Public Understanding of, and Attitudes toward, Scientific Research: What We Know and What We Need to Know , 2004 .

[8]  C. Bann,et al.  Public knowledge and attitudes scale construction: Development of short forms , 2004 .

[9]  N. Allum,et al.  Science in Society: Re-Evaluating the Deficit Model of Public Attitudes , 2004 .

[10]  Mark Regnerus,et al.  The Measure of American Religion: Toward Improving the State of the Art , 2000 .

[11]  Dale N. Glaser,et al.  Jiving the Four-Step, Waltzing Around Factor Analysis, and Other Serious Fun , 2000 .

[12]  Jon D. Miller.  The measurement of civic scientific literacy , 1998 .

[13]  Rex B. Kline,et al.  Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling , 1998 .

[14]  Robert M. O'Brien,et al.  Identification of Confirmatory Factor Analysis Models of Arbitrary Complexity , 1996 .

[15]  J. Durant,et al.  The relationship between knowledge and attitudes in the public understanding of science in Britain , 1995 .

[16]  Amy M. Hightower,et al.  Science and Engineering Indicators , 1993 .

[17]  M. Bauer,et al.  Mapping variety in public understanding of science , 1993 .

[18]  R. P. McDonald,et al.  Structural Equations with Latent Variables , 1989 .

[19]  G. Schwarz.  Estimating the Dimension of a Model , 1978 .

[20]  L. Tucker,et al.  A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis , 1973 .

[21]  Thomas M. Guterbock,et al.  Measurement and Operationalization of the "Science in the Service of Citizens and Consumers" Framework , 2011 .

[22]  C. Toumey.  Science in the service of citizens and consumers. , 2011, Nature nanotechnology.

[23]  K. Anderson,et al.  A Creationist Perspective of Beneficial Mutations in Bacteria , 2008 .

[24]  Timothy R. Brophy.  Book Review: A Creationist Review and Preliminary Analysis of the History, Geology, Climate, and Biology of the Galápagos Islands , 2007 .

[25]  Jon D. Miller.  The Development of Civic Scientific Literacy in the United States , 2000 .

[26]  P. Bentler,et al.  Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis : Conventional criteria versus new alternatives , 1999 .

[27]  A. Raftery.  Bayesian Model Selection in Social Research , 1995 .

[28]  R. Numbers.  The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design , 1993 .

[29]  T. Wood.  www.answersingenesis.org/contents/379/arj/v3/Hominid Baraminology.pdf Baraminological Analysis Places Homo habilis, Homo rudolfensis, and , 2022 .