CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 4Animal and Plant Science EducationPro-Environmental Behavior and AttitudesScience Education and Pedagogy

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Tasting to preserve: An educational activity to promote children’s positive attitudes towards intraspecific diversity conservation

Open access
Pessoa, Patrícia, Aboim, Sara, Afonso, Lisa, Lopes, J. Bernardino, Sá-Pinto, Xana·2024·PLOS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0285649PMC PMC10781109

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

On the edge of causing the sixth big mass extinction event, the development of positive attitudes towards the conservation of intraspecific diversity from early ages is essential to overcome the biodiversity crisis we currently face. However, there is no information available on elementary school students’ attitudes toward intraspecific diversity conservation nor is there a framework available to perform such analysis. For this study we designed, implemented, and evaluated an educational activity planned for third graders (8 to 13 years old) to explore the intraspecific diversity of vegetables and promote healthy eating habits. Additionally, a framework was developed to evaluate students’ attitudes towards intraspecific diversity conservation and applied to semi-structured interviews conducted with students before and after engaging in the educational activity. In this paper we present a reliable framework, developed aligned with the ABC model of attitudes, based on literature, and adapted to elementary school students’ responses, to evaluate students’ attitudes toward intraspecific diversity. Our results show that, before the educational activity, most students choose a non-biodiverse option, justifying this choice with the affective component of attitudes: mostly emotional factors but also aesthetic and social/cultural factors. After the educational activity, we observed a significant increase in the frequency of students that choose the biodiverse option and that justified it with the cognitive component of attitudes: mainly with biology and health knowledge factors, but also with economic and ethical knowledge factors. Our findings support the positive impact of educational activities that explore vegetable varieties on students’ attitudes toward intraspecific diversity conservation. This activity may also be used to foster education for sustainability and address socioscientific issues aligned with diverse sustainable development goals.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0285649

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig 1 Example of the bean varieties placed in the seven bag options.
Fig 1 Example of the bean varieties placed in the seven bag options.CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig 2 Schematic of the links established between the ABC model of attitude and the structure of students’ answers to the interview.
Fig 2 Schematic of the links established between the ABC model of attitude and the structure of students’ answers to the interview.CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig 3 Frequencies of students’ answers assigned to each factor in pre- and post-test according to bag choice. The light green bars indicate the students of the target group who chose the biodiverse bag in the pre-test (BiodivPre). Dark green bars indicate the students of the target group who chose the biodiverse bag in the post-test (BiodivPost). Light orange bars indicate the students of the target group who chose the bags with one variety in the pre-test (OneDivPre). Dark orange bars indicate the students of the target group who chose the bags with one variety in the post-test (OneDivPost).
Fig 3 Frequencies of students’ answers assigned to each factor in pre- and post-test according to bag choice. The light green bars indicate the students of the target group who chose the biodiverse bag in the pre-test (BiodivPre). Dark green bars indicate the students of the target group who chose the biodiverse bag in the post-test (BiodivPost). Light orange bars indicate the students of the target group who chose the bags with one variety in the pre-test (OneDivPre). Dark orange bars indicate the students of the target group who chose the bags with one variety in the post-test (OneDivPost).CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig 4 Difference between the absolute frequencies of students’ answers assigned to each factor in the pre- and post-test according to change or non-change in behavioral intention. Yellow bars indicate the students who chose a bag with only one variety in the pre- and post-test (OneDivPre-OneDivPost). Blue bars indicate the students who chose the biodiverse bag in the pre- and post-test (BiodivPre-BiodivPost). Green bars indicate the students who chose a bag with only one variety in the pre-test and the biodiverse bag in the post-test (OneDivPre-BiodivPost).
Fig 4 Difference between the absolute frequencies of students’ answers assigned to each factor in the pre- and post-test according to change or non-change in behavioral intention. Yellow bars indicate the students who chose a bag with only one variety in the pre- and post-test (OneDivPre-OneDivPost). Blue bars indicate the students who chose the biodiverse bag in the pre- and post-test (BiodivPre-BiodivPost). Green bars indicate the students who chose a bag with only one variety in the pre-test and the biodiverse bag in the post-test (OneDivPre-BiodivPost).CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 64

  1. S Mammola, 2019, Scientists’ Warning on the Conservation of Subterranean Ecosystems, BioScience, 69, 641, 10.1093/biosci/biz064 · DOI
  2. EA Williams‐Subiza, 2021, Drivers of biodiversity loss in freshwater environments: A bibliometric analysis of the recent literature., Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst., 31, 2469, 10.1002/aqc.3627 · DOI
  3. A. Gray, 2019, The ecology of plant extinction: rates, traits and island comparisons, Oryx, 53, 424, 10.1017/S0030605318000315 · DOI
  4. CA Hallmann, 2017, More than 75 percent decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas., PLOS ONE, 12, e0185809, 10.1371/journal.pone.0185809 · DOI · Paper page
  5. WJ Ripple, 2017, World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice, BioScience, 67, 1026, 10.1093/biosci/bix125 · DOI
  6. United Nations, 2015, Sustainable Development Goals—United Nations.
  7. L Glowka, 1994, A guide to the Convention on Biological Diversity., 161
  8. GMA Bermudez, 2020, “What Matters Is Species Richness”—High School Students’ Understanding of the Components of Biodiversity., Res Sci Educ., 50, 2159, 10.1007/s11165-018-9767-y · DOI
  9. P Lindemann‐Matthies, 2009, The integration of biodiversity education in the initial education of primary school teachers: four comparative case studies from Europe., Environ Educ Res., 15, 17, 10.1080/13504620802613496 · DOI
  10. S Menzel, 2009, The Loss of Biodiversity as a Challenge for Sustainable Development: How Do Pupils in Chile and Germany Perceive Resource Dilemmas?, Res Sci Educ., 39, 429, 10.1007/s11165-008-9087-8 · DOI
  11. R Campos, 2013, Early evolution of evolutionary thinking: teaching biological evolution in elementary schools., Evol Educ Outreach, 6, 25, 10.1186/1936-6434-6-25 · DOI
  12. S Des Roches, 2021, Conserving intraspecific variation for nature’s contributions to people., Nat Ecol Evol., 5, 574, 10.1038/s41559-021-01403-5 · DOI · Paper page
  13. K Gormley, 2022, Same, same but different! Exploring children’s understandings of within-species variation, J Biol Educ., 1, 10.1080/00219266.2022.2081244 · DOI
  14. R Frankham, 2002, Introduction to conservation genetics, 617, 10.1017/CBO9780511808999 · DOI
  15. B Hallgrímsson, 2005, Variation and Variability. In: Variation, Elsevier, 1
  16. S Des Roches, 2017, The ecological importance of intraspecific variation., Nat Ecol Evol, 2, 57, 10.1038/s41559-017-0402-5 · DOI
  17. I Morales-Castilla, 2020, Diversity buffers winegrowing regions from climate change losses, Proc Natl Acad Sci, 117, 2864, 10.1073/pnas.1906731117 · DOI
  18. J Baniszewski, 2021, Wheat intraspecific diversity suppressed diseases with subdued yield, economic return and arthropod predation services, Agric Ecosyst Environ, 315, 107438, 10.1016/j.agee.2021.107438 · DOI
  19. LD Snyder, 2020, Crop Varietal Mixtures as a Strategy to Support Insect Pest Control, Yield, Economic, and Nutritional Services., Front Sustain Food Syst., 4, 60, 10.3389/fsufs.2020.00060 · DOI
  20. S de Haan, 2019, The Nutritional Contribution of Potato Varietal Diversity in Andean Food Systems: a Case Study., Am J Potato Res., 96, 151, 10.1007/s12230-018-09707-2 · DOI
  21. R Nankya, 2021, Diversity in Nutrient Content and Consumer Preferences of Sensory Attributes of Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Varieties in Ugandan Agroecosystems, Sustainability, 13, 2658, 10.3390/su13052658 · DOI
  22. WC Kyle, 2020, Youth are demanding action regarding climate change: will educators have the wisdom and courage to respond?, APEduC Rev-Investig E Práticas Em Educ Em Ciênc Matemática E Tecnol, 1, 150
  23. SJ Breckler, 1984, Empirical validation of affect, behavior, and cognition as distinct components of attitude., J Pers Soc Psychol, 47, 1191, 10.1037/0022-3514.47.6.1191 · DOI · Paper page
  24. R Gifford, 2014, Personal and social factors that influence pro-environmental concern and behaviour: A review, Int J Psychol, 49, 141
  25. A Kollmuss, 2002, Mind the Gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior?, Environ Educ Res., 8, 239, 10.1080/13504620220145401 · DOI · Paper page
  26. D Li, 2019, What influences an individual’s pro-environmental behavior? A literature review, Resour Conserv Recycl., 146, 28, 10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.03.024 · DOI
  27. NJ Jalil, 2018, Factors Affecting the Awareness of Biodiversity Conservation Among Students in Malaysia Private University., Int J Eng Technol., 7, 791, 10.14419/ijet.v7i4.35.23109 · DOI
  28. DS Levine, 2012, Environmental Attitudes, Knowledge, Intentions and Behaviors Among College Students., J Soc Psychol.May, 152, 308, 10.1080/00224545.2011.604363 · DOI
  29. RE Petty, 1999, Dual process theories in social psychology, 41
  30. R Asshoff, 2020, Teaching changes interest and attitudes of students towards bedbugs., Int J Sci Educ., 42, 1818, 10.1080/09500693.2020.1788745 · DOI
  31. RL White, 2018, Birds in the playground: Evaluating the effectiveness of an urban environmental education project in enhancing school children’s awareness, knowledge and attitudes towards local wildlife., PLOS ONE, 13, e0193993, 10.1371/journal.pone.0193993 · DOI
  32. CA Fonseca, 2021, Shooting skinks for good: Producing a movie improves attitudes towards a threatened species, Sci Total Environ, 791, 148356, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148356 · DOI
  33. N Špur, 2020, Influence of experience, interest, knowledge and learning source on children’s attitudes towards extensive grassland conservation, Environ Conserv, 47, 130, 10.1017/S0376892920000119 · DOI
  34. J Schlegel, 2015, Local Insects as Flagship Species to Promote Nature Conservation? A Survey among Primary School Children on Their Attitudes toward Invertebrates, Anthrozoös, 28, 229, 10.1080/08927936.2015.11435399 · DOI
  35. LM Rosalino, 2017, Conservation priorities for elementary school students: Neotropical and European perspectives., Biodivers Conserv., 26, 2675, 10.1007/s10531-017-1380-2 · DOI
  36. T Bruckermann, 2021, Identifying precursory concepts in evolution during early childhood–a systematic literature review, Stud Sci Educ, 57, 85, 10.1080/03057267.2020.1792678 · DOI
  37. J Pinela, 2012, Ferreira ICFR. Nutritional composition and antioxidant activity of four tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L.) farmer’ varieties in Northeastern Portugal homegardens, Food Chem Toxicol, 50, 829, 10.1016/j.fct.2011.11.045 · DOI
  38. A Podsędek, 2000, Compositional characterisation of some apple varieties, Eur Food Res Technol, 210, 268, 10.1007/s002179900101 · DOI
  39. Education Ministry, 2001, Primary education national curriculum–essential skills
  40. L Afonso, 2021, The taste of biodiversity: science and sensory education with different varieties of a vegetable to promote acceptance among primary school children., Public Health Nutr, 24, 2304, 10.1017/S1368980020004371 · DOI
  41. M Vadiveloo, 2019, Sensory variety in shape and color influences fruit and vegetable intake, liking, and purchase intentions in some subsets of adults: A randomized pilot experiment., Food Qual Prefer., 71, 301, 10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.08.002 · DOI
  42. L Cohen, 2018, Research Methods in Education.
  43. RA Duschl, 2007, Taking science to school: learning and teaching science in grades K-8, 387
  44. National Research Council (U.S.), 2012, A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas., 385
  45. C Darbellay, 2004, Changes in flavour and texture during the ripening of strawberries, Eur Food Res Technol, 218, 167, 10.1007/s00217-003-0822-0 · DOI
  46. A Thomas, 2017, The Bitter Taste Receptor TAS2R16 Achieves High Specificity and Accommodates Diverse Glycoside Ligands by using a Two-faced Binding Pocket., Sci Rep., 7, 7753, 10.1038/s41598-017-07256-y · DOI
  47. Z Conrad, 2018, Greater vegetable variety and amount are associated with lower prevalence of coronary heart disease: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1999–2014., Nutr J., 17, 67, 10.1186/s12937-018-0376-4 · DOI
  48. JA Mennella, 2014, Ontogeny of taste preferences: basic biology and implications for health, Am J Clin Nutr, 99, 704S, 10.3945/ajcn.113.067694 · DOI
  49. Y He, 2022, Current Perspectives on Food Oral Processing., Annu Rev Food Sci Technol., 13, 167, 10.1146/annurev-food-052720-103054 · DOI
  50. N. Rogers, 2015, Why illness might leave a bitter taste in the mouth, Nature. 2015 Apr 29;nature, 17415
  51. CJ van Riper, 2017, Toward an integrated understanding of perceived biodiversity values and environmental conditions in a national park., Ecol Indic., 72, 278, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.07.029 · DOI
  52. AK Verma, 2016, Biodiversity: Its Different Levels and Values, Int J Environ Sci, 7, 143
  53. UH Graneheim, 2004, Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness., Nurse Educ Today., 24, 105, 10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001 · DOI · Paper page
  54. ML McHugh, 2012, Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic., Biochem Medica., 276, 10.11613/BM.2012.031 · DOI · Paper page
  55. SE Stemler, 2004, A Comparison of Consensus, Consistency, and Measurement Approaches to Estimating Interrater Reliability.
  56. K. Lahm, 2007, The blackwell encyclopedia of sociology
  57. A Miralles, 2019, Empathy and compassion toward other species decrease with evolutionary divergence time., Sci Rep., 9, 19555, 10.1038/s41598-019-56006-9 · DOI · Paper page
  58. VJ Kontsiotis, 2022, Public attitudes towards venomous and non-venomous snakes, Sci Total Environ, 831, 154918, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154918 · DOI
  59. DCI Koh, 2006, Snake venom components and their applications in biomedicine, Cell Mol Life Sci, 63, 3030, 10.1007/s00018-006-6315-0 · DOI
  60. DP Pandey, 2016, Public perceptions of snakes and snakebite management: implications for conservation and human health in southern Nepal., J Ethnobiol Ethnomedicine., 12, 22, 10.1186/s13002-016-0092-0 · DOI
  61. Directorate General of Education, 2016, Curricular Guidelines for Pre-School Education, Ministry of Education
  62. E MacDonald, 2016, Applying the Elaboration Likelihood Model to increase recall of conservation messages and elaboration by zoo visitors., J Sustain Tour., 24, 866, 10.1080/09669582.2015.1091464 · DOI
  63. Nancy M. Wells, 2006, Nature and the Life Course: Pathways from Childhood Nature Experiences to Adult Environmentalism., Child Youth Environ, 16, 1, 10.1353/cye.2006.0031 · DOI
  64. CD Rosa, 2018, Nature Experiences and Adults’ Self-Reported Pro-environmental Behaviors: The Role of Connectedness to Nature and Childhood Nature Experiences., Front Psychol, 9, 1055, 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01055 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Pessoa, P., Aboim, S., Afonso, L., Lopes, J. B., & Sá-Pinto, X.
Affiliations
  • University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro (PT)
  • Centro de Investigação e Inovação em Educação (PT)
  • Universidade do Porto (PT)
Corresponding author
  • Pessoa, Patrícia
  • Aboim, Sara
  • Afonso, Lisa
  • Lopes, J. Bernardino
ORCID
Venue
PLOS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2024-01-10
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
e0285649
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0285649
PMC
PMC10781109
OpenAlex
W4390693787
Cited by
4
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 3
FWCI
1.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (2020.05634.BD, UIDB/00194/2020)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Animal and Plant Science Education
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Pro-Environmental Behavior and Attitudes
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
Keywords
intraspecific variation, biodiversity conservation, children's attitudes, educational activities, vegetable varieties, healthy eating habits, ABC model of attitudes, elementary school students, sustainability education, socioscientific issues, biodiversity crisis
MeSH terms
Optimism, Adolescent, Child, Educational Status, Emotions, Humans, Students, Vegetables, Biodiversity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review