Immersive VR for Organic Chemistry: Impacts on Performance and Grades for First-Generation and Continuing-Generation University Students

Innovative Higher Education - Rapid advances in the quality and accessibility of immersive virtual reality (IVR) have brought about intense interest in applications of the technology within higher...     

Getting Everyone to the Fair: Supporting Teachers in Broadening Participation in Science and Engineering Fairs

Journal of Science Education and Technology - Science and Engineering (S&E) fairs are a valuable educational activity and are believed to increase students’ engagement and learning in...     

Which ingroup,when? Effects of gender,partisanship, veteran status,and evaluator identities on candidate evaluations

Military service is acknowledged as one of many elements voters use to evaluate candidates, but it has primarily been studied as a univariate element of a candidate’s biography. This project experimentally manipulates veteran status, gender, and partisanship as potentially interactive heuristics for evaluation of a hypothetical candidate specifically regarding military issues. We found an almost universal benefit enjoyed by veterans over civilians regardless of whether the candidate was a member of the participant’s partisan ingroup or outgroup. We also found little evidence of a gender penalty, and even a benefit for women candidates who were veterans, though this benefit was restricted to evaluations from Republican women. We also found that Democratic respondents assigned a penalty to outgroup veteran men candidates. We explain these nuanced findings in the context of moderation by gender mis/alignment between participant and candidate. Implications of the study are offered.