{"title":"Psychometric Properties of Statistics Anxiety Measures: A Systematic Review","authors":"Palmira Faraci, Gaia Azzurra Malluzzo","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09897-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The phenomenon of statistics anxiety, prevalent particularly among students engaged in non-mathematical disciplines such as the social sciences, has been linked to a multitude of detrimental outcomes. Over time, several instruments have been developed to measure this construct; however, a comprehensive analysis of these instruments and an adequate evaluation of their psychometric properties have been conspicuously absent. In an attempt to bridge this gap, we undertook a systematic review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and PubMed. Our focus was on studies that were published in peer-reviewed English journals and reported a self-report measure of statistics anxiety. These included both original developments and further validations. We employed Skinner’s three-stage framework to assess the methodological quality of the instruments that were retrieved. Out of the 225 results that our search yielded, a mere 28 satisfied the inclusion criteria. The resulting papers reported on the psychometric properties of eight scales. The identified measures undoubtedly provide the potential of capturing some of the key features of the construct. However, our analyses unveiled certain psychometric limitations. Consequently, we advise researchers to either use the most psychometrically robust measures or conduct additional evaluations to ensure the accuracy of their results.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09897-8","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The phenomenon of statistics anxiety, prevalent particularly among students engaged in non-mathematical disciplines such as the social sciences, has been linked to a multitude of detrimental outcomes. Over time, several instruments have been developed to measure this construct; however, a comprehensive analysis of these instruments and an adequate evaluation of their psychometric properties have been conspicuously absent. In an attempt to bridge this gap, we undertook a systematic review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and PubMed. Our focus was on studies that were published in peer-reviewed English journals and reported a self-report measure of statistics anxiety. These included both original developments and further validations. We employed Skinner’s three-stage framework to assess the methodological quality of the instruments that were retrieved. Out of the 225 results that our search yielded, a mere 28 satisfied the inclusion criteria. The resulting papers reported on the psychometric properties of eight scales. The identified measures undoubtedly provide the potential of capturing some of the key features of the construct. However, our analyses unveiled certain psychometric limitations. Consequently, we advise researchers to either use the most psychometrically robust measures or conduct additional evaluations to ensure the accuracy of their results.
期刊介绍:
Educational Psychology Review aims to disseminate knowledge and promote dialogue within the field of educational psychology. It serves as a platform for the publication of various types of articles, including peer-reviewed integrative reviews, special thematic issues, reflections on previous research or new research directions, interviews, and research-based advice for practitioners. The journal caters to a diverse readership, ranging from generalists in educational psychology to experts in specific areas of the discipline. The content offers a comprehensive coverage of topics and provides in-depth information to meet the needs of both specialized researchers and practitioners.