Psychometric Properties of Statistics Anxiety Measures: A Systematic Review

IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Palmira Faraci, Gaia Azzurra Malluzzo
{"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.

Abstract Image

统计焦虑测量的心理计量特性:系统回顾
统计焦虑现象在非数学学科(如社会科学)的学生中尤为普遍,这种焦虑与多种有害结果有关。随着时间的推移,人们开发了多种工具来测量这种焦虑;然而,对这些工具的全面分析以及对其心理测量特性的充分评估却明显缺乏。为了填补这一空白,我们根据系统性综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南,利用 PsycINFO、Scopus、Web of Science、MEDLINE 和 PubMed 进行了系统性综述。我们关注的重点是发表在同行评审的英文期刊上并报告了统计焦虑自我报告测量结果的研究。这些研究包括原始开发和进一步验证。我们采用了斯金纳的三阶段框架来评估所检索工具的方法质量。在我们检索到的 225 项结果中,仅有 28 项符合纳入标准。这些论文报告了八个量表的心理测量特性。所确定的测量方法无疑有可能捕捉到该结构的一些关键特征。然而,我们的分析揭示了某些心理测量的局限性。因此,我们建议研究人员要么使用心理测量学上最可靠的测量方法,要么进行额外的评估以确保其结果的准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Educational Psychology Review
Educational Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
15.70
自引率
3.00%
发文量
62
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信