Do Girls Really Experience More Anxiety in Mathematics? Flashcards
Thomas Goetz, Madeleine Bieg, Oliver Lüdtke, Reinhard Pekrun, and Nathan C. Hall University of Koblenz, 2013
What did previous study find regarding gender differences in Math and anxiety?
What are the implications?
- females typically obtain similiar or (only) slightly lower results in math compared to males
- females report higher levels in anxiety in math (meta-analyses)
- math anxiety negatively predicts course enrollment, career choices and learn
- hence, it may have contributed to the underrepresentation of females in STEM fields
What may be limitations in previous findings about math anxiety and gender?
- previous studies used self-reports of traitlike (habitual) anxiety
- this can lead to very results compared to state anxiety (in real-life situations)
- this study wants to assess if there is an actual state anxiety difference between men and women
What are the theoretical differences between state and trait anxiety?
- empirical findings suggest that trait anxiety (self-reported) are influenced by subjective beliefs
- these beliefs are less likely to influence state anxiety
- this is an assumption of the accessibility model of emotional self-reports:
- state measures are assumed to evaluate emotions
- trait measures are assumed to rather evaluate belief about emotions
How may subjective beliefs of competence influence math anxiety?
- competence beliefs may play a central role in self-reports of trait emotions
- it may be an “antecedent of anxiety
- girls typically report lower perceived competence, self-efficacy and perceived ability
- this may be due to gender stereotypes as e.g. “Girls and math is a bad fit”
What is the hypothesis by the current study from Goetz et al. (2013)?
They propose that:
- the gender gap in math anxiety is due to using self-reports methods that evaluate trait anxiety
- this trait anxiety may be influenced by personal comppetence beliefs
- measures of state anxiety during math exercises and test would show a smaller gender gap and be less influenced by competence beliefs
- even though not a focus: that girls and boys get relatively similar math grades
- previous studies found this difference in trait and state measures (e.g. coping strategies) but not on math anxiety
What were the two studies by Goetz et al. (2013) and which variables were assessed?
- Both studies evaluated trait and state anxiety, self-reports of perceived competency and math grades
- varrious age groups as well as test and class-related anxiety was assessed
- both studies used experience-sampling methods
- Study 1
- 5th to 10th graders
- test anxiety was assessed with trait and state anxiety measures
- Study 2
- 8th and 11th graders
-
class-related anxiety was assessed with trait and state anxiety measures
- state measures during regular class
What is tth experience-sampling method?
The experience sampling method (ESM) is a strategy for gathering information from individuals about their experience of daily life as it occurs. It is a phenomenological approach, meaning that the individual’s own thoughts, perceptions of events, and allocation of attention are the primary objects of study.
Sample of study 1:
- multiple grade levels of the top track of the education system in Germany (ca. 1/3 of student cohort)
- 584 students (24 classes, six schools)
- grades 5 to 10
- 45% female, 55% male
- mean age: 13.67, SD: 1.84
Sample of study 2:
- 111 students (2 to 4 students selected randomly from 41 classrooms across seven schools)
- grades 8 and 11
- 53% female, 47% male
- mean age: 15.96, SD 1.71
Procedure of Study 1 and 2, respectively.
Both studies: standardized questionnaire at the beginning followed by state self-report measurements
Study 1:
- state math test anxiety was assessed immediately before the test and twice during it ( after 1/3 and after after 2/3 of the test)
- the self-report meaasures were integrated into the answer sheet
Study 2:
- class-related anxiety was assessed via a digital questionnaire presented on a personal digital assistant (PDA) following a randomised audible signal
- once per class
- over two weeks
- ca. five assessments per student
How were the variables assessed?
- Anxiety
- Anxiety:
- in study 1:
- trait math anxiety was assessed using the Achievement Emotions Questionnaire (four items, how students typically felt during a math test)
- state math anxiety was measured with 1 item:
- “I am anxious”
- both used a five-point Likert-scale
- in study 2:
- one item, trait anxiety: “How much anxiety do you generally experience during math class”?
- one item, state anxiety: “How much anxiety do you experience duriing this class?”
- both had a five-point Likert scale
How were the variables assessed?
- perceived competence:
- operationalised as self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs
- study 1:
- self-efficacy was measured with a four item scale from PISA assessments
- e.g. “I am confident that I can understand even the most difficult content in math”
- 5-point Likert scale
- study 2:
- academic self-concept measured with three items of the Self-Description Questionnaire
- e.g. “math is one of my best subjects”
- 5-point Likert scale
How were the variables assessed?
- Achievement
In both studies:
- operationalised as students mid-term grades
- typically based on one single written exam and oral exams
- grades range from 1 (very good) to 6 (insufficient)
- for this studies values were inverted to facilitate comprehension (hence, 6 = very good, 1 = insufficient)
How was the data analysed and modeled?
- multileve, intraindividual modeling approach to account for the nested structure of the data
- both studies used Hierarchical Linear Modeling software
- multilevel analysis consisted of three levels:
- measures within students
- student level
- class level
Explain the implications of levels one:
- measures within students
outcome variable were anxiety scores.
sudy 1
- trait anxiety: anxiety score divided by number of items
- state anxiety: three measurements, one before and two during test
Study 2:
- trait anxiety: outcome on single item
- experience sampling method, four ratings per student (on average)
- variables were coded 0 (state anxiety and 1 (trait anxiety)
- therefore, intercept: Y000 describes overall mean state anxiety for males (because male/female was also coded 0 and 1)
- hence, Y100 indicates the difference between trait and state anxiety…positive scores indicate that trait scores were larger
- This variable’s effect (γ100) can be interpreted
as the difference between trait and state anxiety
scores, with positive values indicating that trait scores
were higher than state scores