ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Norwegian validation of the University Student Engagement Inventory.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study reports on the validation of the University Student Engagement Inventory (USEI) in a Norwegian context. The USEI conceptualizes student engagement (SE) as a three-factor first-order construct encompassing cognitive, emotional, and behavioral dimensions and as a second-order construct. Psychometric analysis was conducted with a sample of 833 students from Norwegian universities and university colleges, representing both science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and non-STEM fields (humanities and social sciences). Psychometric analysis is reported, including distributional properties, sources of evidence related to the internal structure, and external criteria. The paper presents an invariance analysis for area of study and gender. Criterion validity was evaluated with respect to students' dropout intention, failed university courses, and use of medication to cope with study-related challenges. The USEI demonstrated good factorial construct validity and reliability for both the first- and second-order constructs. Higher levels of SE significantly predicted lower dropout intentions, fewer failed courses, and reduced medication use among Norwegian students. The study demonstrates that the USEI can deliver reliable, valid data on SE in the Norwegian context. It has predictive value for academic variables and is therefore important for policymakers and stakeholders in the education system.
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.