ArticlePloS one2026
Assessing mathematics anxiety with the AMAS: Measurement invariance across four countries.
Article in PloS one, 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
Mathematics Anxiety (MA) affects people of all ages, influencing academic success and daily life. The Abbreviated Math Anxiety Scale (AMAS) is a widely used self-report questionnaire measuring MA and has been psychometrically evaluated in different languages and age groups. However, its cross-cultural measurement invariance, namely whether AMAS items are perceived the same way by people across different countries and cultures, is unknown. Such measurement invariance is a precondition for meaningful cross-cultural comparisons. This study investigated cross-cultural measurement invariance of the AMAS in UK, German, Italian, and Polish university students, using data from 3610 participants from the "Big AMAS database". We found evidence of partial invariance; only one item (item 8) was perceived differently across countries. Partial measurement invariance indicates that latent factor means of the AMAS can be meaningfully compared across the four considered countries. However, a notable methodological consideration arose - the measurement invariance results heavily depended on the estimator used. This study emphasises the importance of testing for measurement invariance across groups to enable meaningful cross-group comparisons, and it highlights the critical role of the estimation method selection and its impact on the conclusions of psychometric studies.
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.