Todd A, Romine WL. Validation of the learning progression-based assessment of modern genetics in a college context. Int J Sci Educ. 2016;38(10):1673–98. The brightly coloured Measure-Mate™ is perfect for non-standard measuring or the introduction of standard units Fisman, R., Iyengar, S. S., Kamenica, E., & Simonson, I. (2006). Gender differences in mate selection: evidence from a speed dating experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(2), 673-697. doi: 10.1162/qjec.2006.121.2.673. Popper K. Philosophy of science. In: Mace CA, editor. British Philosophy in the Mid-Century. London: George Allen and Unwin; 1957. Greiling, H., & Buss, D. M. (2000). Women’s sexual strategies: The hidden dimension of extra-pair mating. Personality and Individual Differences, 28(5), 929–963. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00151-8.

Apostolou, M., & Wang, Y. (2018). Parent–offspring conflict over mating in Chinese families: Comparisons with Greek Cypriot families. Evolutionary Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474704918764162. Rutledge ML, Warden MA. The development and validation of the measure of acceptance of the theory of evolution instrument. School Sci Math. 1999;99(1):13–8. Increasing evolution acceptance remains an important implicit target for biology instruction across the globe, now more than ever given recent empirical (Romine et al. 2016; Nadelson and Southerland 2010) and theoretical (Deniz et al. 2008; Ha et al. 2012) work documenting the marriage of evolution acceptance and content understanding. Indeed, evolution acceptance may be an important component of meeting the plausibility and fruitfulness conditions suggested by conceptual change theory (Strike and Posner 1992) required before students are willing to accept scientific ideas explaining how species change over time (Deniz et al. 2008). Interpretation of the moderate relationship between evolution knowledge and acceptance (Romine et al. 2016; Nadelson and Southerland 2010) through the lens of conceptual change theory suggests that evolution acceptance may serve as an important intermediary between biology instruction and a student’s willingness to actually change his/her ideas about evolution (Deniz et al. 2008). Putting a quantitative measure on evolution acceptance therefore becomes important toward facilitating understanding of how our instruction is impacting the way our students think about evolution. Nehm RH, Schonfeld IS. Does increasing biology teacher knowledge of evolution and the nature of science lead to greater preference for the teaching of evolution in schools? J Sci Teacher Educ. 2007;18:699–723.Benjamin, D. J., Berger, J. O., Johannesson, M., Nosek, B. A., Wagenmakers, E. J., Berk, R., … Cesarini, D. (2018). Redefine statistical significance. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0189-z.

Patch, E. A., & Figueredo, A. J. (2017). Childhood stress, life history, psychopathy, and sociosexuality. Personality and Individual Differences, 115, 108–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.023. Ferguson, C. J., & Heene, M. (2012). A vast graveyard of undead theories: publication bias and psychological science’s aversion to the null. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 555–561. doi: 10.1177/1745691612459059. Simpson, J. A., & Gangestad, S. W. (1991). Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(6), 870–883. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.6.870.Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.107.2.238. Boone WJ. Rasch analysis for instrument development: why, when, and how? CBE Life Sci Educ. 2016;15(4):4. Participants answered sociodemographic questions including sex, age, U.S. citizenship, U.S. state residency, relationship status, religious affiliation, ethnicity, education level, and sexual orientation (categorical). Mate Preferences Questionnaire