ArticleAnatomical sciences education2025
Differences in motivation for biology learning: A measurement invariance testing and latent mean comparison approach.
Article in Anatomical sciences education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Bioscience Educators' Purpose in a Modern World.eNeuro · 2025Article
- Differences in motivation for biology learning: A measurement invariance testing and latent mean comparison approach.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Educational and psychological research often involves comparing motivation across groups. It is critical to ensure that observed differences in motivation are true variations by group, not due to measurement biases. With a diverse sample of undergraduate students (N = 2200), this study measured internal consistency and gathered validity evidence based on the internal structure of five motivation scales. To compare motivation for biology between groups of undergraduate students, this study tested for measurement scalar invariance by group and, accordingly, conducted latent factor mean comparisons to understand true group differences. On average, female students held lower expectancy beliefs and self-efficacy for biology learning than males. Female students perceived higher attainment value and utility value for biology learning and higher psychological cost. First-generation college students held lower expectancy beliefs and self-efficacy but perceived higher attainment value for biology learning than continuing-generation students. No differences in average motivation for biology learning were found between underrepresented racial minority (URM) and non-URM students. The implications of these findings and future research directions are also discussed.
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.