The prevalent stereotype that scientific fields do not afford opportunities to fulfill goals of helping others deters student interest and participation in science. We investigated whether introductory college science textbooks that highlight the prosocial utility value of science can be used to change beliefs about the affordances of scientific work. In study 1, undergraduate students who were randomly assigned to read a science textbook chapter with added prosocial utility value expressed greater beliefs that the science topic afforded prosocial goals and increased interest in the scientific topic, compared with two control conditions. Mediation analysis demonstrated that interest was enhanced through increased beliefs that the topic afforded prosocial opportunities. Multiple group comparison tests indicated that underrepresented minority students (i.e., African Americans, Latinos, and Native Americans) might benefit the most from efforts to strengthen prosocial affordance beliefs. In study 2, we conducted a brief landscape analysis of science textbooks and found that texts are missing opportunities to emphasize the prosocial utility value of science. We discuss recommendations for science educators, curriculum designers, and researchers who want to increase and broaden science participation.

Vol. 19, No. 3

September 01, 2020

Supplemental Materials

Metrics

Downloads & Citations

Downloads: 384

Citations: 5

History

Submitted: 12 September 2019

Revised: 6 April 2020

Accepted: 17 April 2020

Information

© 2020 J. Zambrano et al. CBE—Life Sciences Education © 2020 The American Society for Cell Biology. This article is distributed by The American Society for Cell Biology under license from the author(s). It is available to the public under an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 3.0 Unported Creative Commons License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0).

We thank research assistants from the Motivation and Social Identity Lab for their assistance in data collection and coding. We also thank science professors Tom Huxford, Matt Anderson, John Love, and Leroy McClenaghan from San Diego State University for loaning or donating their textbooks to us, and we thank monitoring editor Sarah L. Eddy and two anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful feedback on this article. Data collected for this study and preparation of this article were supported in part by the Chancellor’s Doctoral Incentive Program (California State University, Office of the Chancellor); Associated Students Inc. Student Research Funds from California State University, Long Beach; and grant DRL-1622991 from the NSF. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are our own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.

PDF download