<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hyojeong Hwang</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jeongju Park</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Eunyeong Park</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Duk-Ho Chung</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jachoon Koo</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jun-Ki Lee</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">DOMAIN-DIFFERENTIATED RESEARCHER REPRESENTATIONS AND FUTURE OCCUPATIONAL ASPIRATIONS OF SCIENCE-GIFTED STUDENTS</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">domain differentiation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Draw-A-Scientist Test</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">gifted science education</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">occupational aspirations</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">researcher representations</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">science-gifted students</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2026</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">October / 2026</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://oaji.net/articles/2026/987-1793131796.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">25</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Continuous</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The Draw-A-Scientist Test (DAST) has repeatedly shown that students hold a single, stereotyped image of the scientist, a middle-aged white man in a lab coat working alone indoors. This study asked whether that singular image holds when science-gifted students are prompted to draw an expert in their own field and when their drawings are considered alongside their envisioned occupational futures. A total of 128 science-gifted students (grades 6–8; 98 boys, 30 girls) from nine specialization tracks at a university-affiliated science-gifted education institute completed a modified DAST, asking them to draw a researcher from their own field showing &quot;where, with what tools, and doing what,&quot; together with open-response items on their hoped-for occupation and future aspirations. Drawings were coded using a developmentally and domain-adapted three-layer scheme (classic stereotype markers; figure representation; domain-specific practice), and future-self-related responses were coded for occupational science linkage, aspiration orientation, and learning needs. Classic stereotype indicators were rare, while domain-related research practices were represented. Researcher representations also differed across specialization domains, particularly in research activities. Most students named a STEM-related future occupation, and their aspirations focused on social contribution and the pursuit of knowledge. Researcher representations and envisioned occupational futures showed partial alignment at the domain level.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">5</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">870-883</style></section></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hyojeong Hwang</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jun-Ki Lee</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">PRESERVICE TEACHERS' DECISION-MAKING ON INVASIVE SPECIES MANAGEMENT: A KNOWLEDGE–ACTION DISCONNECT ACROSS CONTEXTS</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">biology teacher education</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">decision-making</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ecosystem disruption</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">invasive species</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">preservice teachers</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">scenario-based learning</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">science education</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2026</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">February/2026</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://journals.indexcopernicus.com/search/article?articleId=4765168</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">25</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">continuous</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Decisions about invasive species management often require individuals to balance ecological knowledge with ethical considerations and practical constraints, particularly in everyday and educational contexts. Grounded in frameworks of ecological literacy and socioscientific issues, this study conceptualizes invasive species management as a context-dependent decision-making process that integrates scientific knowledge, ethical reasoning, and professional judgment. Using scenario-based inquiry, 191 Korean preservice biology teachers responded to two contrasting situations involving red-eared slider turtles (Trachemys scripta elegans): managing an abandoned pet in a household context and addressing overpopulation within a school breeding program. Qualitative content analysis revealed notable discrepancies between preservice teachers’ understanding of invasive species and ecosystem-disrupting species, as well as inconsistencies between articulated ecological concerns and recommended actions. Decision-making patterns differed markedly by context, with household scenarios shaped primarily by emotional and practical considerations, whereas institutional scenarios emphasized professional responsibility and institutional management. These findings highlight persistent gaps in preservice teachers’ understanding of invasive species management and demonstrate the powerful influence of context on professional judgment. The study highlights important implications for science teacher education, particularly the need to foster integrated decision-making competencies that connect ecological understanding, ethical reasoning, and context-sensitive decision-making for managing invasive species.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">39-54</style></section></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hyojeong Hwang</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jun-Ki Lee</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ECOLOGICAL SCIENTISTS' DECISION-MAKING UNDER UNCERTAINTY AND IGNORANCE: IMPLICATIONS FOR BIOLOGY EDUCATION</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">adaptive expertise</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">biology education</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">decision-making patterns</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ecological experts</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">post-normal science</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">scientific ignorance</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">scientific uncertainty</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2025</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">December/2025</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://journals.indexcopernicus.com/search/article?articleId=4713337</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">24</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">continuous</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ecological scientists routinely make decisions in contexts where scientific uncertainty and ignorance constrain available evidence, yet empirical research on how they judge such situations remains limited. Understanding these decision-making processes is critical because ecological crises—such as biological invasions and chemical accidents—require rapid action despite incomplete information. Accordingly, this study aimed to examine how ecological field experts respond cognitively, emotionally, and behaviorally to different uncertainty-laden scenarios. The study involved 16 ecological field experts from a single national context (with an average experience of 22.0 years), specializing in amphibians, reptiles, freshwater fish, and birds. Data were collected using three scenario-based instruments representing increasing levels of uncertainty, risk, and urgency, and analyzed through constant comparative analysis. Four distinct decision-making types emerged: Consistent Knowledge-Seekers (25.0%), Risk-Escalating Responders (25.0%), Action-Oriented Responders (25.0%), and Policy-Focused Responders (25.0%). As risk increased across scenarios, the research orientation decreased from 93.8% to 43.8%, while the preventive/management orientation increased to 56.2%. Additionally, emotional responses intensified to 25.0% in the high-risk scenario. These findings underscore the importance of biology education in leveraging uncertainty as a learning resource and fostering students’ contextual scientific reasoning, adaptive expertise, and communication competencies.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">6</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1132-1147</style></section></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hyojeong Hwang</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jun-Ki Lee</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">JUDGING INVASIVENESS UNDER SCIENTIFIC UNCERTAINTY: VALUE ORIENTATIONS AND REASONING PATTERNS OF PRE-SERVICE BIOLOGY TEACHERS ON THE GOLDEN APPLE SNAIL</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">decision making</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">invasive species</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">pre-service teachers</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">scientific uncertainty</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">value orientation</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2025</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">October/2025</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://journals.indexcopernicus.com/search/article?articleId=4659913</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">24</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">continuous</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">In the Anthropocene era, science educators must equip students to reason through uncertainty and navigate value-laden environmental dilemmas. This study aimed to examine how pre-service biology teachers make value-based decisions when facing scientific uncertainty, using the case of the golden apple snail (Pomacea canaliculata) and its designation as an invasive species. Drawing on the framework of post-normal science and environmental ethics, a scenario-based mixed-methods survey was conducted with 191 participants across five universities in South Korea. Quantitative results showed that 69.1% of respondents supported the designation, typically adopting ecocentric and precautionary perspectives, while 30.9% opposed it, citing anthropocentric pragmatism and techno-optimism. Qualitative analysis revealed confirmation bias and temporal framing patterns, with participants selectively interpreting evidence in ways consistent with their prior value orientations. These findings highlighted the importance of fostering uncertainty literacy, critical thinking, and ethical reasoning in science teacher education. The study offers international relevance by addressing how future educators construct environmental judgments under uncertainty, with implications for curriculum design across diverse socio-ecological contexts.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">5</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">894-904</style></section></record></records></xml>