# Validation of the Chinese version of the scientific imagination inventory in primary school students

## TL;DR

This study validates a Chinese version of a tool to assess scientific imagination in primary school students, showing it is reliable but with some limitations in comparing different groups.

## Contribution

The study provides the first validation of the Scientific Imagination Inventory in a Chinese cultural context for primary school students.

## Key findings

- The Chinese version of the SII demonstrated acceptable reliability and a three-dimensional, six-factor structure.
- Criterion validity was supported through a significant correlation with the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire.
- Measurement invariance tests indicated a lack of scalar invariance across gender and grade levels.

## 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 (χ2/df = 1.553, RMSEA = 0.049, CFI = 0.906). Criterion validity was established through a significant correlation with the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire (VVIQ). Both internal consistency (α = 0.86) and split-half reliability (0.82) were satisfactory. The Chinese version of the SII showed adequate reliability and validity and is suitable for assessing the development of scientific imagination among primary school students in the sampled context. However, tests of measurement invariance indicated a lack of scalar invariance across gender and grade levels. Therefore, although the SII’s factor structure is generalizable to the Chinese context, our results underscore the critical importance of considering cultural and developmental response patterns when interpreting scores. Caution is advised against making direct mean comparisons across demographic groups.