Abstract

Rapid digitalization and growing environmental challenges require students to critically evaluate scientific information and develop responsible conservation attitudes. Limited empirical evidence explains whether scientific argumentation mediates the relationships between digital and science literacy and students’ conservation attitudes. This study examined the structural relationships between digital literacy and science literacy and students’ conservation attitudes, with scientific argumentation positioned as a potential mediator. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in February 2026 involving 314 senior high school students in Pangkep Regency, Indonesia. Participants were selected using purposive sampling. Data were collected using a self-report questionnaire and analyzed through partial least squares structural equation modeling using SmartPLS 4. The measurement model demonstrated acceptable reliability and convergent validity. Digital literacy and science literacy were positively associated with both scientific argumentation and conservation attitudes. However, scientific argumentation was not significantly associated with conservation attitudes and did not mediate the relationships between either digital literacy or science literacy and conservation attitudes. These findings suggest that digital literacy and science literacy are directly associated with conservation attitudes, whereas scientific argumentation is more appropriately understood as a cognitive outcome of literacy competencies rather than as a mediating mechanism. Accordingly, instruction and school policy should integrate digital and scientific literacy, value reflection, ecological concern, and authentic conservation activities to improve educational quality.

Keywords

References

• Abulibdeh, A., Zaidan, E., & Abulibdeh, R. (2024). Navigating the confluence of artificial intelligence and education for sustainable development in the era of Industry 4.0: Challenges, opportunities, and ethical dimensions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 437, 140527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.140527
• Allchin, D., & Zemplén, G. Á. (2020). Finding the place of argumentation in science education: Epistemics and whole science. Science Education, 104(5), 907–933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21589
• Almulla, M. A. (2023). Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for students’ critical thinking, creativity, and problem solving to affect academic performance in higher education. Cogent Education, 10(1), 2172929. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2172929
• Ardoin, N. M., Bowers, A. W., & Gaillard, E. (2020). Environmental education outcomes for conservation: A systematic review. Biological Conservation, 241, 108224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108224
• Ariely, M., & Yarden, A. (2026). Promoting students’ critical evaluation of popular scientific articles: The influence of critical discussions using contradictory scientific texts of different genres. International Journal of Science Education, 48(12), 1842–1867. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2025.2490778
• Arslan, H. O., Genc, M., & Durak, B. (2023). Exploring the effect of argument-driven inquiry on pre-service science teachers’ achievement, science process, and argumentation skills and their views on the ADI model. Teaching and Teacher Education, 121, 103905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103905
• Atik, A. D., Işıldar, G. Y., & Erkoç, F. (2022). Prediction of secondary school students’ environmental attitudes by a logistic regression model. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 24(3), 4355–4370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01618-3
• Audrin, C., & Audrin, B. (2022). Key factors in digital literacy in learning and education: A systematic literature review using text mining. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 7395–7419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10832-5
• Ballard, H. L., Lindell, A. J., & Jadallah, C. C. (2024). Environmental education outcomes of community and citizen science: A systematic review of empirical research. Environmental Education Research, 30(6), 1007–1040. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2024.2348702
• Becker, J.-M., Cheah, J.-H., Gholamzade, R., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2023). PLS-SEM’s most wanted guidance. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 35(1), 321–346. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-04-2022-0474
• Børresen, S. T., Ulimboka, R., Nyahongo, J., Ranke, P. S., Skjaervø, G. R., & Røskaft, E. (2023). The role of education in biodiversity conservation: Can knowledge and understanding alter locals’ views and attitudes towards ecosystem services? Environmental Education Research, 29(1), 148–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2022.2117796
• Busetto, L., Wick, W., & Gumbinger, C. (2020). How to use and assess qualitative research methods. Neurological Research and Practice, 2, Article 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-020-00059-z
• Carayannis, E. G., & Morawska-Jancelewicz, J. (2022). The futures of Europe: Society 5.0 and Industry 5.0 as driving forces of future universities. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 13, 3445–3471. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00854-2
• Casas-Quiroga, L., & Crujeiras-Pérez, B. (2020). Epistemic operations performed by high school students in an argumentation and decision-making context: Setrocia’s alimentary emergency. International Journal of Science Education, 42(16), 2653–2673. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1824300
• Castillo-Huitrón, N. M., Naranjo, E. J., Santos-Fita, D., Peñaherrera-Aguirre, M., Prokop, P., Cisneros, R., Gallegos, S. V., & Ježová, Z. (2024). Influence of human emotions on conservation attitudes toward relevant wildlife species in El Triunfo Biosphere Reserve, Mexico. Biodiversity and Conservation, 33, 2423–2439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-024-02863-4
• Cepeda, G., Roldán, J. L., Sabol, M., Hair, J., & Chong, A. Y. L. (2024). Emerging opportunities for information systems researchers to expand their PLS-SEM analytical toolbox. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 124(6), 2230–2250. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-08-2023-0580
• Chen, D., Xu, T., Qiao, D., & Liu, Z. (2025). Exploring the impact of digital literacy and policy cognition on rural residents’ eco-friendly behaviors. Environmental Management, 75(4), 806–821. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-024-02065-2
• Cheung, G. W., Cooper-Thomas, H. D., Lau, R. S., & Wang, L. C. (2024). Reporting reliability, convergent and discriminant validity with structural equation modeling: A review and best-practice recommendations. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 41(2), 745–783. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-023-09871-y
• Dawson, V. (2024). Teachers’ support in developing year 7 students’ argumentation skills about water-based socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 46(3), 222–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2023.2226334
• Downey, H., Cooke, S. J., Walsh, J. C., Alves, J. A., Amano, T., Haddaway, N. R., Abrahams, M. I., Antwis, R. E., Cadotte, M., Jones, J. P. G., Cook, C. N., Littlewood, N., Adum, G., Akasaka, M., Arellano, E. C., Axmacher, J., Bennett, J. R., Bolam, F. C., Barclay, H., … Sutherland, W. J. (2021). Training future generations to deliver evidence-based conservation and ecosystem management. Ecological Solutions and Evidence, 2(1), e12032. https://doi.org/10.1002/2688-8319.12032
• Elangovan, N., & Sundaravel, E. (2021). Method of preparing a document for survey instrument validation by experts. MethodsX, 8, 101326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2021.101326
• Fırat, E. A., Köksal, M. S., & Bahşi, A. (2021). Effects of technology-enhanced constructivist learning on science achievement of students with different cognitive styles. Education and Information Technologies, 26(4), 3659–3676. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10427-0
• Garrecht, C., Christenson, N., Gericke, N., Haglund, J., Appelgren, J., & Harms, U. (2026). Unpacking climate literacy in science education: What explains students’ willingness to engage in climate action? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 63(4–5), 393–411. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.70045
• Guenther, P., Guenther, M., Ringle, C. M., & Zaefarian, G. (2023). Improving PLS-SEM use for business marketing research. Industrial Marketing Management, 111, 127–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2023.03.010
• Guerrero, G., & Sjöström, J. (2025). Critical scientific and environmental literacies: A systematic and critical review. Studies in Science Education, 61(1), 41–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2024.2344988
• Guo, X., Shao, F., Hao, X., Ji, X., & Hu, W. (2026). Research on students’ scientific reasoning and argumentation abilities in socio-scientific issues context: Integrated constructive and critical perspectives. Research in Science Education, 56(2), 603–628. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-025-10288-4
• Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Liengaard, B. D. (2024). Going beyond the untold facts in PLS-SEM and moving forward. European Journal of Marketing, 58(13), 81–106. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-08-2023-0645
• Helferich, M., Thøgersen, J., & Bergquist, M. (2023). Direct and mediated impacts of social norms on pro-environmental behavior. Global Environmental Change, 80, 102680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2023.102680
• Högström, P., Gericke, N., Wallin, J., & Bergman, E. (2025). Teaching socioscientific issues: A systematic review. Science & Education, 34(5), 3079–3122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-024-00542-y
• Hu, X., & Bi, H. (2025). Exploring and validating the componential model of students’ scientific critical thinking in science education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 55, 101695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101695
• Ika Sari, G., Winasis, S., Pratiwi, I., Wildan Nuryanto, U., & Basrowi. (2024). Strengthening digital literacy in Indonesia: Collaboration, innovation, and sustainability education. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 10, 101100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.101100
• Jaeger, S. R., & Cardello, A. V. (2022). Factors affecting data quality of online questionnaires: Issues and metrics for sensory and consumer research. Food Quality and Preference, 102, 104676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2022.104676
• Jebarajakirthy, C., Sivapalan, A., Das, M., Maseeh, H. I., Ashaduzzaman, M., Strong, C., & Sangroya, D. (2024). A meta-analytic integration of the theory of planned behavior and the value-belief-norm model to predict green consumption. European Journal of Marketing, 58(4), 1141–1174. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-06-2021-0436
• Kang, J., & Teig, N. (2025). Which science matters? The role of biology, chemistry, physics, and earth science in shaping students’ environmental attitudes and behaviours. International Journal of Science Education, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2025.2579584
• Kock, N. (2017). Common method bias: A full collinearity assessment method for PLS-SEM. In H. Latan & R. Noonan (Eds.), Partial least squares path modeling: Basic concepts, methodological issues and applications (pp. 245–257). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64069-3_11
• Kresin, S., Kremer, K., & Büssing, A. G. (2024). Students’ credibility criteria for evaluating scientific information: The case of climate change on social media. Science Education, 108(3), 762–791. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21855
• Kumar, V., Kumar, S., & Singh, R. (2024). Environmental socio-scientific issues as contexts in developing scientific literacy in science education: A systematic literature review. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 9, 100765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100765
• Landolfi, E. (2023). Scientific literacy as part of the science-for-all movement. International Journal of Didactical Studies, 4(1), 20382. https://doi.org/10.33902/ijods.202320382
• Lengieza, M. L., & Aviste, R. (2025). Relationships between people and nature: Nature connectedness and relational environmental values. Current Opinion in Psychology, 62, 101984. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2024.101984
• Liu, P., Teng, M., & Han, C. (2020). How does environmental knowledge translate into pro-environmental behaviors? The mediating role of environmental attitudes and behavioral intentions. Science of the Total Environment, 728, 138126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138126
• Mago, M., Yadav, M., Sharma, S., & Kaur, H. (2025). Environmental knowledge influencing pro-environmental behavior among university students: A serial mediation and MGA approach. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 26(5), 1072–1095. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-02-2024-0110
• Marttunen, M., Salminen, T., & Utriainen, J. (2021). Student evaluations of the credibility and argumentation of online sources. The Journal of Educational Research, 114(3), 294–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2021.1929052
• Masuwai, A., Zulkifli, H., & Hamzah, M. I. (2024). Evaluation of content validity and face validity of secondary school Islamic education teacher self-assessment instrument. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2308410. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2308410
• Mellberg, S., Danielsson Friberg, A., & Nygren, T. (2025). Science education against misinformation: An educational intervention in upper-secondary schools. International Journal of Science Education, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2025.2571131
• Mesci, G., Erdas-Kartal, E., & Yeşildağ-Hasançebi, F. (2025). The effect of argumentation-based inquiry on preservice teachers’ understanding of the nature of science, inquiry, and scientific literacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 162, 105064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2025.105064
• Mikołajczak, K. M., Barlow, J., Lees, A. C., Ives, C. D., Strack, M., de Almeida, O. T., Souza, A. C., Sinclair, F., & Parry, L. (2023). Evaluating the influence of nature connection and values on conservation attitudes at a tropical deforestation frontier. Conservation Biology, 37(4), e14067. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14067
• Molnár, Z., Kiss, P. S., Gálfi, M., & Radács, M. (2026). The importance of environmental attitudes in dealing with the environmental crisis and the relationship between education systems: A systematic review. Discover Education, 5, Article 112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-026-01133-5
• Nascimento, J., & Loureiro, S. M. C. (2024). Understanding the desire for green consumption: Norms, emotions, and attitudes. Journal of Business Research, 178, 114675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.114675
• Niemiec, R. M., Champine, V., Vaske, J. J., & Mertens, A. (2020). Does the impact of norms vary by type of norm and type of conservation behavior? A meta-analysis. Society & Natural Resources, 33(8), 1024–1040. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2020.1729912
• Nygren, T., & Guath, M. (2022). Students evaluating and corroborating digital news. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 66(4), 549–565. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2021.1897876
• Osborne, J., & Allchin, D. (2025). Science literacy in the twenty-first century: Informed trust and the competent outsider. International Journal of Science Education, 47(15–16), 2134–2155. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2024.2331980
• Osei, E. G., Boakye, R. O., & Osei-Bona, H. K. (2025). Video-based multimedia instructions and academic performance: An analysis of gender differences in learning linear equations at the basic school. Sustainable and Pedagogical Technologies, 1(1), e41090. https://doi.org/10.33902/SPT.202541090
• Pimentel, D. R. (2025). Learning to evaluate sources of science (mis)information on the internet: Assessing students’ scientific online reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 62(3), 684–720. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21974
• Polizzi, G. (2020). Digital literacy and the national curriculum for England: Learning from how the experts engage with and evaluate online content. Computers & Education, 152, 103859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103859
• Qhobela, M., Makhechane, M., & Ssendija, T. (2026). From pedagogical content knowledge to education for sustainable development: How pre-service physics teachers justify laboratory waste decisions during teaching practice. Sustainable Education and Digital Transformation. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.33902/SEDT.202629923
• Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Sinkovics, N., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2023). A perspective on using partial least squares structural equation modelling in data articles. Data in Brief, 48, 109074. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2023.109074
• Saputri, D. Y., Sukarmin, S., Asrowi, A., & Riyadi, R. (2026). Ecopedagogy-based experiential learning model: An effective effort in shaping environmentally concerned attitudes. Journal of Pedagogical Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202638969
• Sarstedt, M., Adler, S. J., Ringle, C. M., Cho, G., Diamantopoulos, A., Hwang, H., & Liengaard, B. D. (2024). Same model, same data, but different outcomes: Evaluating the impact of method choices in structural equation modeling. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 41(6), 1100–1117. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12738
• Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Liengaard, B. D. (2022). Progress in partial least squares structural equation modeling use in marketing research in the last decade. Psychology & Marketing, 39, 1035–1064. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21640
• Sarstedt, M., & Moisescu, O. I. (2024). Quantifying uncertainty in PLS-SEM-based mediation analyses. Journal of Marketing Analytics, 12(1), 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41270-023-00231-9
• Singh, S., & Sagar, R. (2021). A critical look at online survey or questionnaire-based research studies during COVID-19. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 65, 102850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2021.102850
• Son, M., & Ha, M. (2025). Development of a digital literacy measurement tool for middle and high school students in the context of scientific practice. Education and Information Technologies, 30(4), 4583–4606. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12999-z
• Svedholm-Häkkinen, A. M., Forzani, E., Coiro, J., & Kiili, C. (2025). Online credibility evaluation skills in upper secondary students: The role of grade level, argument evaluation, and analytic thinking dispositions. Learning and Individual Differences, 118, 102640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102640
• Tamar, M., Wirawan, H., Arfah, T., & Putri, R. P. S. (2021). Predicting pro-environmental behaviours: The role of environmental values, attitudes and knowledge. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 32(2), 328–343. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-12-2019-0264
• Uluçınar, U., & Sezer, A. (2026). Exploring signs in nature: The vlog experiences of preservice teachers. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology, 8(2), e45073. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPSP.202645073
• van de Wetering, J., Leijten, P., Spitzer, J., & Thomaes, S. (2022). Does environmental education benefit environmental outcomes in children and adolescents? A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 81, 101782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2022.101782
• van der Leij, T., Avraamidou, L., Wals, A., & Goedhart, M. (2022). Supporting secondary students’ morality development in science education. Studies in Science Education, 58(2), 141–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.1944716
• Vig, S. (2025). Tapping into values: Exploration of water conservation intentions using the value-attitude-behaviour theory. Social Responsibility Journal, 21(10), 2173–2198. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-09-2024-0637
• Washington, H., Piccolo, J. J., Kopnina, H., & O’Leary Simpson, F. (2024). Ecological and social justice should proceed hand-in-hand in conservation. Biological Conservation, 290, 110456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2024.110456
• Zhang, J., & Browne, W. J. (2023). Exploring Chinese high school students’ performance and perceptions of scientific argumentation by understanding it as a three-component progression of competencies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 60(4), 847–884. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21819
• Zhang, L., Liu, X., & Feng, H. (2023). Development and validation of an instrument for assessing scientific literacy from junior to senior high school. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 5, Article 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-023-00093-2

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.