Further refinement and validation of the revised test anxiety scale

Benson, Jeri; El-Zahhar, Nabil

doi:10.1080/10705519409539975

Cited by 94 publications

(92 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The third appraisal is testing-problem efficacy, or the potential to deal with any problem that occurs during the test (Schutz & Davis, 2000;Schutz et al, 2004). Schutz et al found that the appraisal dimension was negatively correlated with the worry subscale of the Revised Test Anxiety scale (Benson & El-Zahhar, 1994); in that study, seeing oneself as being in control and able to deal with potential problems that may come up during a test was associated with less worry, a key dimension of test anxiety.…”

Section: Theoretical Context: Approach-avoidance Motivesmentioning

confidence: 92%

Investigating Transactions Among Motives, Emotional Regulation Related to Testing, and Test Emotions

DeCuir–Gunby¹,

Aultman²,

Schutz³

2009

The Journal of Experimental Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors examined the relationships among achievement motives, emotional regulation, and emotions. They collected data from 425 college undergraduates (110 men, 315 women) and used several scales, including the Achievement Motives Scales ). Findings suggest that approach-avoidance motives were related to different academic emotions (i.e., pleasant and unpleasant) in the expected directions. Approach-avoidance variables, cognitive-appraisal processes, and during-testing processes explained significant amounts of variance in both test hope and test pride, and several categories of students emerged, including those of high approach-low avoidance, low approachhigh avoidance, moderate approach-high avoidance, high approach-moderate avoidance, and moderate approach-low avoidance. The authors also discuss future research and implications. ) used Atkinson's (1960) original 2 × 2 model of the approach-avoidance motive to examine the quadrapolar transactions between the motive to avoid failure and the motive to approach success. Covington and colleague's use of the median-split method with the approach-avoidance motive resulted in the potential of four groups of students: (a) overstrivers (high approach and high avoidance), who tend to have high hopes for success and excessive fear of failure; (b) success-oriented students (high approach and low avoidance), who tend to have high hopes for success and low concern over the fear of failure; (c) failure-avoiding students (low approach and high avoidance), who tend to use the fear of failure as their reason for achieving; and (d) failure acceptors (low approach and low avoidance), who tend to display an absence of both tendencies. Covington and colleague's work suggested that these different groups of students transact and experience unpleasant emotions differently.This long line of research has clearly suggested that approach-avoidance motives may represent basic human processes and that these processes may be related to anxiety and other unpleasant emotions. Thus, to broaden our understanding of emotional regulation related to testing, we used the approach-avoidance motive to develop a theory regarding how these basic motives relate to emotional regulation related to testing and the emotions experienced during testing. Emotional Regulation During TestingGross (1998) defined emotional regulation as "the processes by which individuals influence which emotions they have, when they have them, and how they experience and express these emotions" (p. 275). As such, emotional regulation within the context of self-regulation involves various processes, such as monitoring, evaluating, and modifying one's emotional experiences (Schutz & Davis, 2000;Schutz & DeCuir, 2002;Thompson, 1994). Students direct these efforts at accomplishing their goals by influencing the types of emotions and the intensity and timing of those emotional experiences. Thus, useful emotional regulation involves flexible, situationally responsive, and performance-enhancing strategies used to move the students tow...

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Context: Approach-avoidance Motivesmentioning

confidence: 92%

Investigating Transactions Among Motives, Emotional Regulation Related to Testing, and Test Emotions

DeCuir–Gunby¹,

Aultman²,

Schutz³

2009

The Journal of Experimental Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The RTA, our measure of test anxiety, comprises 20 items that make up four sub-scales relating to worry (e.g., During the test I think about how I should have prepared for the test), tension (e.g., I start to feel very uneasy just before getting a test paper back), test-irrelevant thinking (e.g., While taking test I sometimes think about being somewhere else) and bodily sensations (e.g., I get a headache during an important test), and a total scale score. Through confirmatory factor analysis and cross validations, Benson and El-Zahhar (1994) have demonstrated that this scale is stable and has excellent psychometric properties. The DASS was included to determine whether any effects found were more due to depression than test anxiety.…”

Section: Questionnaire Measures (Rta Mill Hill Dass)mentioning

confidence: 94%

“…0/5.86). Test anxiety group (high vs. medium vs. low) was determined by scores on the worry component of the Revised Test Anxiety Scale (RTA; Benson and El-Zahhar, 1994). Participants who scored in the upper (14 or above) and lower (8 or below) quartiles of the sampled group RTA-worry scores were defined as high and low in worry.…”

Section: Methods Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Participants were administered the Revised Test Anxiety Scale (RTA; Benson and El-Zahhar, 1994), the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS; Lovibond and Lovibond, 1995), and section B of the Mill Hill Vocabulary Scale (MHVS; Raven, 1965). The RTA, our measure of test anxiety, comprises 20 items that make up four sub-scales relating to worry (e.g., During the test I think about how I should have prepared for the test), tension (e.g., I start to feel very uneasy just before getting a test paper back), test-irrelevant thinking (e.g., While taking test I sometimes think about being somewhere else) and bodily sensations (e.g., I get a headache during an important test), and a total scale score.…”

Section: Questionnaire Measures (Rta Mill Hill Dass)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Test anxiety, susceptibility to distraction and examination performance

Keogh

Bond

French

et al. 2004

Anxiety, Stress & Coping

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…More specifically, the authors tested whether previously investigated dimensions of test anxiety can appropriately be subsumed under a common construct using higher-order confirmatory factor models (i.e., models comprising a second-order factor Test Anxiety accounting for covariances among primary factors). For this purpose, TAI-G items and items of the Revised Test Anxiety Scale (RTA; Benson et al ., 1992;Benson and El-Zahhar, 1994) were combined and given to a bi-national sample of American and German university students. Thus, the test anxiety dimensions included in this study were Emotionality (TAI-G Emotionality items and RTA Bodily Symptoms as well as Tension items), Worry (TAI-G and RTA items), Distraction (TAI-G Interference items and RTA Test-Irrelevant Thinking items) and Lack of Confidence (TAI-G items; for details see Hodapp and Benson, 1997).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%