1 Catley, K.M., L.R. Novick, and C.K. Shade. 2010. Interpreting evolutionary diagams: When topology and process conflict. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 47(7):861-882.
2 Novick, L.R., C.K. Shade, and K.M. Catley. 2011. Linear versus branching depictions of evolutionary history: Implications for diagram design. Topics in Cognitive Science 3:536-559.
3 Bajpai, S., J.G.M. Thewissen,and A. Sahni, A. 2009. The origin and early evolution of whales: macroevolution documented on the Indian Subcontinent. Journal of Bioscience 34:673-686.
4 Novick, L.R., and K.M. Catley. 2007. Understanding phylogenies in biology: The influence of a gestalt perceptual principle. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 13:197-223.
5 Novick, L.R., K.M. Catley, and D.J. Funk. 2010. Characters are key: The effect of synapomorphies on cladogram comprehension. Evolution Education and Outreach. Published online January 19.
6 Novick, L.R., A.T. Stull, and K.M. Catley. 2012. Reading phylogenetic trees: Effects of tree orientation and text processing on comprehension. BioScience 62:757-764.
7 Trautwein, M.D., B.M. Wiegmann, R. Beutel, K.M. Kjer, and D.K. Yeates. 2012. Advances in insect phylogeny at the dawn of the postgenomic era. Annual Review of Entomology 57:449-468.
8 Gregory, T.R. 2008. Understanding evolutionary trees. Evolution and Education Outreach 1:121-137.
9 Meir, E., J. Perry, J.C. Herron, and J. Kingsolver. 2007. College students' misconceptions about evolutionary trees. American Biology Teacher 69:71-76.
10 Diamond, J., and E.M. Evans. 2007. Museums teach evolution. Evolution 61(6):1500-1506.
11 Phillips, B.C., L.R. Novick, and K.M. Catley. 2013. The great chain of being: How diagram design may mislead students to reason teleologically about human evolution. Manuscript in preparation.
12 Dodick, J. 2010. Phylogeny exhibits and understanding geological time. Paper presented at the Understanding the Tree of Life, Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh, PA.
13 Catley, K.M., and L.R. Novick. 2008. Seeing the wood for the trees: An analysis of evolutionary diagrams in biology textbooks. BioScience 58(10):976-987.
14 Ran, J., H. Gao, and X. Wang. 2010. Fast evolution of the retroprocessed mitochondrial rps3 gene in Conifer II and further evidence for the phylogeny of gymnosperms. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 54:136-149.
15 Kocot, K.M., J.T. Cannon, C. Todt, M.R. Citarella, A.B. Kohn, A. Meyer, … and K.M. Halanych. 2011. Phylogenomics reveals deep molluscan relationships. Nature 477:452-457.
16 Soltis, P.S., and D.E. Soltis. 2013. Angiosperm phylogeny: A framework for studies of genome evolution. In I.J. Leitch et al. (eds.), Plant Genome Diversity Volume 2. Springer-Verlat, Wien.
17 Novick, L R., and K.M. Catley. 2012. When relationships depicted diagrammatically conflict with prior knowledge: An investigation of students' interpretations of evolutionary trees. Invited resubmission under review.
18 Donovan, S., and L. Wilcox. 2004. Tree figures in texts: A framework for unpacking their educational potential. Poster presented at the Society for the Study of Evolution meeting, Fort Collins, CO.
19 Simakov, O., F. Marletaz, S. Cho, E. Edsinger-Gonzales, P. Havlak, U. Hellston, … and D.S. Rokhsar. 2012. Insights into bilaterian evolution from three spiralian genomes. Nature. doi:10.1038/nature11696
| | | | | |
Read how others have recognized the Understanding Evolution website.