Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 593

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 56 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

OECD's Brief Self-Report Measure of Educational Psychology's Most Useful Affective Constructs: Cross-Cultural, Psychometric Comparisons Across 25 Countries

Marsh, Herbert W., Hau, Kit-Tai, Artelt, Cordula, Baumert, Jurgen, Peschar, Jules L.·2006·International Journal of Testing

Abstract

Through a rigorous process of selecting educational psychology's most useful affective constructs, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) constructed the Students' Approaches to Learning (SAL) instrument, which requires only 10 min to measure 14 factors that assess self-regulated learning strategies, self-beliefs, motivation, and learning preferences. This study evaluated SAL responses from nationally representative samples of approximately 4,000 15-year-olds from each of 25 countries (N = 107,899)—OECD's Program For International Student Assessment database. In one of the largest and most powerful cross-cultural comparisons of diverse educational psychology constructs, this study used multiple group confirmatory factor analyses to show that SAL's a priori 14-factor solution is well defined and reasonably invariant across the 25 countries, as are relations between SAL factors and 4 criterion variables (gender, socioeconomic status, math achievement, and verbal achievement). The results support posited relations among constructs derived from different theoretical perspectives and their cross-cultural generalizability. The SAL provides a standard set of educational psychological measures that have been translated into many languages with nationally representative norms that have been validated across the world. These should be a useful focus or supplement in diverse educational psychology research settings, and should provide the longitude and latitude against which to map new and existing educational psychology constructs.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1207/s15327574ijt0604_1

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 56 references

Cited by

See all 593

Metadata

Authors
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., Artelt, C., Baumert, J., & Peschar, J. L.
Venue
International Journal of Testing
Published
2006-12
Volume
6
Issue
4
Pages
311-360
ISSN
  • 1530-5058 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7574
OpenAlex
W1993672325
Cited by
593
References
56
FWCI
16.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: OECD's Brief Self-Report Measure of Educational Psychology's Most Useful Affective Constructs: Cross-Cultural, Psychometric Comparisons Across 25 Countries. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15327574ijt0604_1
The paper
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., Artelt, C., Baumert, J., & Peschar, J. L. (2006). OECD's Brief Self-Report Measure of Educational Psychology's Most Useful Affective Constructs: Cross-Cultural, Psychometric Comparisons Across 25 Countries. International Journal of Testing. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327574ijt0604_1

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.