ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Validation of the Chinese version of the scientific imagination inventory in primary school students.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. 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.
- Does project-based STEAM curriculum benefit 3-4-year-old preschoolers' creative potential? A pilot comparison with theme-based curriculum.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intensifying global competition in high technology and generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) urgently calls for support to foster scientific imagination, which is essential for achieving breakthroughs in original innovation. As children enter primary school, their scientific imagination undergoes a rapid surge in development; however, few suitable tools are available to track and assess this growth. The Scientific Imagination Inventory (SII) demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties in samples of Korean students; however, its validity in other cultural contexts has remained unexplored. The present study was designed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the SII, thereby addressing a critical gap in the availability of developmentally appropriate assessment instruments for primary school students in China. A total of 837 students in grades 2 to 6 were recruited from three private and public primary schools in Suzhou, China. Item analysis, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and criterion validity analysis were conducted. The results showed significant correlations between items and their respective dimension scores. EFA identified six factors that explained a cumulative variance of 55.99%. CFA supported a three-dimensional, six-factor structure (χ
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.