Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41169918›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

When emotion meets reason: the development and validation of EpiCT-CI scale to measure epistemic emotions in critical thinking application and cultural identity constructions.

Yue Peng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Yue PengGeneral Education Centre, Guangzhou Academy of Fine Arts, Guangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Epistemic emotion is a significant concept in education, but traditional scales rarely focus on the status of epistemic emotions in intercultural issues. Additionally, cultural identity and critical thinking are vital in navigating the complexities inherent in intercultural contexts. Existing measures of critical thinking and cultural identity seldom consider the influence of emotions. The EpiCT-CI Scale, developed in this research, seeks to bridge this gap by measuring how epistemic emotions influence critical thinking and cultural identity in intercultural settings. Method: Developing and validating the EpiCT-CI Scale combines qualitative and quantitative methods. Study 1 collected data from students' comments, judgments, and narrations about critical thinking during COVID-19. Study 2 focused on the emotional experiences of constructing cultural identity by reading, analyzing, and writing about cultural issues. The data from Studies 1 and 2 are analyzed in NVivo 15.0. The original EpiCT-CI Scale is validated through SPSS 20.0 and Amos 29.0 in Study 3. Results: The results from Studies 1 and 2 indicate that epistemic emotions are a blend of neutral, positive, and negative states, rather than simple linear progressions. The initial 52-item scale underwent a thorough evaluation, modification, and validation process in Study 3, resulting in a four-dimensional 19-item EpiCT-CI Scale, which represents four groups of epistemic emotions: joy in critical cultural inquiry, boredom in critical cultural reflection, curiosity in cultural identity reflection, and distress in cultural adaptation. The EpiCT-CI Scale provides an effective tool for assessing epistemic emotions in cultural identity constructions and critical thinking applications.

Indexed as

critical thinkingcultural identityculturesepistemic emotionscale development

Identifiers

PMID41169918
PMCPMC12568516

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.