ArticleJournal of Intelligence2022
The Revision and Application of Aurora in China: Based on Successful Intelligence.
Article in Journal of Intelligence, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Aurora Battery is a corresponding test of successful intelligence. This study aims to examine the factorial structure of the Chinese version of Aurora Battery and to investigate its internal consistency and validity, as well as to discover the developmental features of Chinese students. A total number of 2007 students were recruited from 13 schools across eastern, central, and western China, ranging from 4th to 8th grade (mean age = 12.29 years) and among them, 43.9% are girls. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to examine the factorial structure. Among the tested models, a second-order factor model, in which the three ability factors serve as indicators of a general factor, provided an acceptable model fit to the data. Moreover, measurement invariance across gender and grades were supported, which suggests the mean scores of analytical, creative, and practical abilities are comparable in this research. The criterion-related validity analysis suggests that the battery and its three subscales have good criterion validity. The scale reliability analysis shows that the Cronbach's alpha and the McDonald's omega value of the whole test were .84 and .87, respectively, indicating the scale's internal reliability is good. For ability differences among grades, students' analytical and practical abilities increase across all grades, while creativity presents an upward trend from grade 4 to 6, followed by a downward trend from grade 6 to 7, and an increase from grade 7 to 8. Female students outperform male students on both analytical and creative ability, while with no obvious difference on practical abilities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.