ArticlePloS one2026
A study on the status quo and influencing factors of science identity in physics among junior high school students.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study examines the status of science identity of physics among middle school students, adopting a mixed-methods approach combining survey data and qualitative interviews, thereby addressing a gap in research on science identity in physics within the transitional context from integrated to discipline-specific curricula in early middle school. Quantitative analyses, including descriptive statistics, cluster analysis, correlation analysis, t-tests, and MANOVA, examined students' science identity status, patterns, and gender differences. Qualitative interviews were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis to explore underlying factors. The findings indicate that students' science identity is moderately positive overall but characterized by an internal imbalance. While interest in science classes emerges as the strongest dimension, science role recognition remains notably weak, revealing an interest-recognition gap. A substantial proportion of students cluster within a neutral identity category, suggesting that the transition from integrated science to subject-based curricula represents a critical and malleable stage in identity development. Gender differences are significant across all dimensions of science identity and become more pronounced at higher grade levels, particularly in learning competence, practical performance, and career interest. Qualitative evidence suggests that these patterns may be associated with increasing academic demands following the transition to discipline-specific curricula, shifts in evaluation approaches, and internalized gender stereotypes. Additionally, limited peer discourse, low perceived proximity to the scientist role, and insufficient exposure to authentic scientific practices further constrain identity formation. Teacher recognition is a critical factor, with female students showing heightened sensitivity to it.
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.