Background and Objectives: Although anxiety consists of multiple components, including cognitive, affective, motivational, and physiological, and some findings suggest that there might be differences regarding their control antecedents and effects on performance, previous studies have largely neglected to examine these components separately and for reasons of convenience often assessed test anxiety as a unified construct using a single-item. Therefore, this study investigated the different test anxiety components with the goal to: (1) examine the relative impact of the anxiety components in the mediating mechanism that connects control and performanceas proposed by Pekrun's control-value theory, and (2) determine which specific anxiety component is underlying common single-item anxiety measures. Methods: The research questions were investigated using an intraindividual approach in a sample of N = 137 German 8th graders during a mathematics exam. Results: As expected, control was negatively related to all anxiety components, but associations varied in strength. Additionally, the components differed in their relative impact on performance, with the cognitive component being central for this outcome. Furthermore, common single-item measures seem to specifically assess the affective component, and thus not the component most relevant for test performance. Conclusion: Consequently, our study strongly recommends to distinguish between the anxiety components depending on the research question at hand.
Background: This study investigated the role of different test anxiety components (affective, cognitive, motivational and physiological) as mediators between control and performance as proposed by Pekrun's control-value theory (CVT). While all components were assessed via self-report, the physiological component was additionally assessed via electrodermal activity (EDA). Aims: We examined the relative impact of the self-reported anxiety components and EDA in this mediating mechanism to identify the most relevant assessment(s) (i.e., self-reported anxiety components and/or EDA) for predicting test performance.
Sample:The study comprised 50 eighth graders. Methods: Data were collected during a mathematics test comprising six task blocks. State self-reports of control and anxiety components along with test performance and other test emotions were collected block-wise (i.e., repeated assessments within students). EDA was continuously recorded. Results: Consistent with CVT, intra-individual mediation analysis with multiple mediators revealed that higher control predicted lower anxiety (i.e., all self-reported components). Unexpectedly, higher control was associated with increased EDA. Follow-up analyses taking other test emotions into account suggested this might reflect positive activation. Correlations between EDA and control and self-reported anxiety components differed depending on which test emotion was dominant in each situation. Regarding test performance, only the cognitive component was a significant mediator and thus seems to play a pivotal role in the relationship between control and performance.
This study examined mathematics anxiety among high and low achieving students (N = 237, grades 9 and 10) by contrasting trait (habitual) and state (momentary) assessments of anxiety. Previous studies have found that trait anxiety measures are typically rated higher than state measures. Furthermore, the academic self concept has been identified to play a moderating role in the trait state discrepancy, with higher academic self concept leading to a lower dis crepancy (i.e. less overestimation of trait anxiety if state assessments reflect actual experience). Therefore, we assumed that high achievers who were expected to have high academic self concepts would exhibit a smaller trait state discrepancy than low achievers. Results confirmed these assumptions and revealed that high achievers even underestimated their trait anxiety. Implications are discussed.
Tests in educational contexts often start with easy tasks assuming that this fosters positive experiences-a sense of control, higher valuing of the test, and more positive and less negative emotions. Although intuitive and widespread, this assumption lacks an empirical basis and a theoretical framework. We conducted a field experiment and randomly assigned 208 students to an easy-to-difficult or a difficult-to-easy condition in a mathematics test.Perceived challenge was measured along with control appraisals, value appraisals, and emotions (enjoyment, pride, anxiety, anger, boredom). While students starting with easy tasks felt less challenged than students starting with difficult tasks in Part 1, no differences emerged regarding control and value appraisals and emotions. In Part 2, students who had started with easy tasks proceeded to difficult tasks and reported higher challenge, lower value and control, and less positive and more negative emotions than students who proceeded from difficult to easy tasks. Control and value appraisals mediated these differences between conditions, especially regarding positive emotions. These results cast doubt on the preference for easy-to-difficult over difficult-to-easy task orders, revealing their potential for causing adverse experiences at the end of the test (e.g., reflecting contrast effects).
Langeweile wird aufgrund ihres häufigen Auftretens oft als «Plage der modernen Gesellschaft» bezeichnet. Auch in Lern- und Leistungssituationen, auf die sich dieser Beitrag konzentriert, zählt Langeweile zu den am häufigsten berichteten Emotionen. Zunächst wird auf die Definition und Operationalisierung von Langeweile eingegangen – hierbei werden aktuelle Ansätze zu unterschiedlichen Formen von Langeweile berücksichtigt. Methoden der Erfassung von Langeweile und die Häufigkeit ihres Auftretens werden vorgestellt. Es folgt eine Diskussion von Theorien und Befunden zu den Effekten, Ursachen und den Umgang mit Langeweile (Coping). Implikationen im Hinblick auf die Prävention und Reduzierung von Langeweile in Lern- und Leistungssituationen werden hieraus abgeleitet.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.