Content uploaded by Abdul-Kareem M. Jaradat
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Abdul-Kareem M. Jaradat on Jun 29, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
! ""
#
"
$%&
#
""
'
(
)*"
!
!" !
!
" # $!%
! & $ '
' ($ ' #% %
)%*%' $ '
+"%&
' ! # $,
($
- .
!
"- (%
.%%%%
$ $$-
-
--
//$$$
0
1"1"#23."
"0" )*4/ +)
*!5!& 6!7%66898&%)-
2:!
* &
#$%&'()*+&,-./,,
; "-#%!<-#% %9==>
/-?9=8@"0")*4/ +)
"3 " &9=8@
1
Table of Contents
I. Theoretical Framework................................................................................ 2
1. Introduction ................................................................................................. 2
2. Test Anxiety ................................................................................................ 3
2.1 Definition .................................................................................................. 3
2.1.1 Anxiety ................................................................................................... 3
2.1.2 Test Anxiety ........................................................................................... 4
2.1.3 Trait Test Anxiety ..................................................................................5
2.1.4 State Test Anxiety .................................................................................. 6
2.2 Manifestations of Test Anxiety................................................................. 6
2.2.1 Cognitive Manifestation.........................................................................6
2.2.2 Physiological Manifestation................................................................... 7
2.2.3 Emotional Manifestation........................................................................ 8
2.2.4 Behavioral Manifestation ....................................................................... 8
2.3 Determinants of Test Anxiety ................................................................... 9
2.3.2 Subjective Determinants ......................................................................10
2.4 Gender Differences .................................................................................12
2.5 Correlates ................................................................................................ 12
2.6 Consequences .......................................................................................... 14
3. Academic Procrastination .........................................................................20
4. Test Anxiety and Procrastination .............................................................. 30
5. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Study Skills Training........................ 31
6. Significance of the Investigation.............................................................. 45
II. Correlational Study................................................................................... 46
1. Questions ................................................................................................... 46
2. Method ...................................................................................................... 46
2.1 Subjects ...................................................................................................46
3. Results ....................................................................................................... 58
4. Discussion ................................................................................................. 6 2
III. Experimental Study ................................................................................. 66
1. Hypotheses ................................................................................................ 66
2. Method ...................................................................................................... 68
3. Results ....................................................................................................... 73
4. Discussion ................................................................................................. 8 9
IV. General Discussion .................................................................................98
V. Abstract .................................................................................................. 104
References ................................................................................................... 105
Appendix A ................................................................................................. 119
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Program for Test Anxiety..........................119
Appendix B ................................................................................................. 132
Study Skills Training Program.................................................................... 132
2
I. Theoretical Framework
1. Introduction
It is important for many students to get the highest grades possible in their
exams. They study hard and make great efforts to achieve this purpose. Some
benefit greatly from the efforts they make, but others do not. Therefore,
counselors try to help students improve their academic performance and cope
with the problems, which may hinder their academic progress. Accordingly,
counselors should be well acquainted with the methods necessary for dealing
with such matters, so that they could do their work more effectively.
Some academic problems that many students experience are related. This
may indicate that these problems stem from the same causes. Students may
experience a problem as a result of certain factors; these factors may also make
them experience problems other than that which they are aware of. Thus, when
counselors deal with the causes of a certain problem through a training program,
they may help students overcome other problems at the same time.
Test anxiety is a problem that many students frequently experience; some
students, however, find that anxiety interferes with their learning and test taking
to such an extent that their grades are seriously affected. These students may
efficiently study, but because they may engage in anxiety-provoking thoughts,
such as fear of failure or desire for perfectionism, they perform poorly.
Furthermore, these same negative thoughts may result in other consequences
such as dissatisfaction with study or procrastination, which may in turn lead to
detrimental academic performance. On the other hand, test-anxious students
may have poor study skills and habits, such as reading without understanding or
poor time management, which may also lead to test anxiety, procrastination and
poor performance as reactions of the lack of knowledge.
3
Research shows that a variety of treatment programs have been designed
for reducing test anxiety, some of them were effective in reducing test anxiety
and/or improving school performance, and others were not. However, so far
there is no program to be recommended to counselors, as highly effective for
achieving both aims. Therefore, there is still a need for developing new
programs with specified components to be easily implemented or modifying old
programs. As suggested in the literature of test anxiety, programs designed to
teach test-anxious students how to challenge anxiety-producing self-statements
and/or help them acquire good study skills may be effective in reducing their
anxiety and increasing their grades.
The present investigation consists of two studies: a descriptive
correlational study and an experimental study. The purpose of the descriptive
correlational study is to examine the relationships between test anxiety,
academic procrastination, academic achievement and satisfaction with study,
whereas the purpose of the experimental study is to compare the effectiveness of
a cognitive behavioral therapy program and a study skills training program in
reducing test anxiety and academic procrastination, and increasing academic
performance and satisfaction with study in high school male students.
2. Test Anxiety
2.1 Definition
I begin by explaining the construct of anxiety, then move on to define the
WHUP³WHVWDQ[LHW\´DQGGLIIHUHQWLDWHEHWZHHQLWVWZRW\SHVWUDLWDQGVWDWH
2.1.1 Anxiety
Anxiety belongs in theory and practice to the concepts of general,
differential, clinical, counseling and educational psychology (Spielberger, 1966,
1972; Tuma & Maser, 1985; Krohne & Laux, 1982; Schwarzer, 1984; I.G.
4
Sarason & Spielberger, 1975). Although researchers have made considerable
progress in the theoretical analysis of anxiety, the identification of the conditions
of its development, the construction of methods to diagnose anxiety and the
invention of therapeutic techniques (Krohne, 1977), tKH\KDYHQ¶W\HWSUHVHQWHGD
clear definition of the term anxiety, perhaps because there is no consensus upon
the various facets included in it (Rost & Schermer, 1989). However, anxiety has
been conceptualized as a probability of a harmful future outcome, and as a
response to a stressful condition (Shechter & Zeidner, 1990, cited in Zeidner,
1998, pp. 17). The phenomenon of anxiety can be characterized by feelings of
anticipation, threat, danger, uneasiness and distress (Rost & Schermer, 1989). In
the following are some of the major attributes of anxiety listed by I. G. Sarason
and Sarason (1990):
-The anxious individual appraises a situation as difficult, threatening, or
challenging.
-The anxious individual perceives himself or herself as being inefficient or
inadequate to the task at hand.
-The anxious individual focuses on undesirable consequences of personal
inadequacy or on undesirable outcomes.
-The anxious individual is preoccupied with self-related thoughts that
compete with cognitive task-related activity.
-The anxious individual expects failure and loss of self-esteem.
2.1.2 Test Anxiety
The term test in test anxiety indicates the anxiety-evoking situation and/or
the causes of anxiety relating to the training, learning and performance in their
wide sense (Rost & Schermer, 1989). The term test anxiety refers to the set of
phenomenological, physiological, and behavioral responses that accompany
5
concern about possible negative consequences or failure on an exam or similar
HYDOXDWLYHVLWXDWLRQ6LHEHU2¶1HLO & Tobias, 1977).
The nature of test anxiety has been characterized as multifaceted and
inclusive of task-irrelevant cognitions, heightened physiological arousal, and
inefficient study behavior (Spielberger, Anton, & Bedell, 1976, cited in Kirkland
& Hollandsworth, 1979). High-test anxious students tend to view evaluative
situations, in general, and test situations, in particular, as personally threatening
(I. G. Sarason, 1986, I. G. Sarason & Sarason, 1990). They most likely have
negative self-images, hold low positions in their peer group and they are often
socially isolated. They are frequently regarded by parents and teachers as
nonconformists and are often underestimated in their cognitive performance.
They frequently have a bad attitude towards work and take less care of their
tasks. They show a high degree of helplessness, lack of self-confidence, low
self-esteem and are less satisfied with themselves. They perform lower in almost
all school subjects, and lower on tests of school achievements, intelligence and
creativity, as compared to their low test-anxious counterparts. They attribute
their academic success to external factors (e.g. to the chance) and their failure to
internal factors (e.g. to the lack of talents). They are frequently absent,
frequently ill and suffer more from failure (Rost & Schermer, 2001).
2.1.3 Trait Test Anxiety
Trait test anxiety refers to a relatively stable individual difference in
anxiety proneness, that is, in the general tendency to perceive stressful test
situations as dangerous or threatening, and to respond to such situations with
varying levels in the intensity of anxiety reactions (Spielberger, 1966). High
trait-anxious students tend to see test situations as more threatening than
students who are low in evaluative trait anxiety. They are more susceptible to
stress in test situations and tend to experience anxiety state reactions of greater
6
intensity and with greater frequency over time than low trait-anxious students
(Zeidner, 1998).
2.1.4 State Test Anxiety
State test anxiety refers to anxiety as a transitory condition occurs in a
student prior to and/or during the test situations, because he/she perceives these
situations as threatening (Spielbeger et al., 1976). This condition is characterized
by conscious feelings of tension and perceived arousal, accompanied by
physiological reactions (e.g. palpitation, sweat, muscle tension), and
accompanied by negative self-statements and thoughts related to failure or poor
achievement (Spielbeger & Vagg, 1995).
2.2 Manifestations of Test Anxiety
Test anxiety has cognitive, physiological, emotional and behavioral
manifestations. It may be reasonable to differentiate between high test-anxious
and low test-anxious individuals through these manifestations.
2.2.1 Cognitive Manifestation
Worry is traditionally viewed as a primary component of the anxiety state
(I. G. Sarason, 1988). Liebert and Morris (1967) defined worry as the cognitive
elements of the anxiety experience, such as negative expectations and cognitive
concerns about oneself, the situation at hand, and potential consequences. Worry
component is triggered by cues related to negative appraisals of exam
SHUIRUPDQFH SHUFHLYHG DV WKUHDWHQLQJ WKH LQGLYLGXDO¶V VHQVH RIDGHTXDF\DQG
worth (Morris et al., 1981). Worrisome thoughts reach a high level early in the
exam process and do not dissipate so rapidly (Liebert & Moris, 1967). It has
been found that worry is significantly negatively related to both performance
expectancy (Liebert & Moris, 1967) and exam performance (Deffenbacher,
1977). Worrisome thoughts may interfere with performance by distracting
7
attention while preparing for the exam and taking the exam (Morris et al., 1981).
In this context, it should be pointed out that task-irrelevant thoughts can be
related to the test performance and can be unrelated. Spielberger and Vagg
(1995) argue that it would be more meaningful to regard the latter as a correlate
and not as a component of test anxiety.
Research indicates that the cognitive elements of test anxiety may be
manifested as worry, misunderstanding the task, not noting the mistakes,
thought blocking, forgetting, poor listening, poor concentration, clinging to the
same thoughts, task irrelevant thoughts, unclear thoughts, not understanding the
questions, reduced attention (Rost & Schermer, 1997), self-focused attention or
negative performance expectations (Deffenbacher, 1980).
2.2.2 Physiological Manifestation
Autonomic arousal is the most dominant response for the expression of
anxiety in stressful situations. Autonomic arousal may manifest during testing in
a variety of physiological responses, such as rapid heart beat, feelings of nausea,
sweating, cold and clammy hands, need to pass urine, and shaking and trembling
(Suinn, 1984). Galassi, Frierson and Sharer (1981) found that the most
frequently reported bodily sensations experienced by university students, in
descending order, were hands or body perspiring, heart beating fast, stomach
tense, dryness in mouth, and hands or body trembling. Studies by Holroyd,
Wetbrook, Wolf, and Badhorn (1978), and Hollandsworth, Glazeski, Kirkland,
Jones and Van Norman (1979) found that high-compared to low-test-anxious
students did not differ in physiological arousal levels both prior to and during a
test, but instead differed in the appraisal and interpretations made about their
arousal (e.g., test-anxious students defined their arousal as debilitative, whereas
low-test anxious students viewed their arousal as a cue to exert greater effort
toward the test).
8
2.2.3 Emotional Manifestation
(PRWLRQDOLW\LVGHILQHGDVRQH¶VSHUFHSWLRQRIWKHSK\VLRORJLFDO-affective
elements of the anxiety experience. This implies awareness of indications of
autonomic arousal and unpleasant feeling states such as nervousness and tension
(Morris et al., 1981). Emotionality rises sharply immediately before the test and
typically wanes as the examinee progresses on the exam (Doctor & Altman,
1969). It has been found that emotionality is elicited primarily by external cues
(e.g., walking into the exam hall, appearance of examiner, distribution of test
booklets), which indicate the initiation of evaluation (Morrris et al., 1981). The
emotional elements of anxiety can be expressed as feelings of restriction,
loneliness, sadness, disappointment or helplessness (Rost & Schermer, 1989).
2.2.4 Behavioral Manifestation
High test-anxious students show significantly lower levels of study skill
competence when compared to low test-anxious students (Wittmaier, 1972).
They are characterized by poor study skills, including utilizing class time, taking
and organizing class notes, preparing for exams, and maximizing their use of
time on objective exams (Culler & Holahan, 1980; Kirkland & Hollandsworth,
1979). They attempt to compensate for their lack of study skills by increasing
the amount of total study time (Culler & Holahan, 1980; Benjamin, Mckeachie,
Lin & Holinger, 1981). They report significantly more problems in encoding,
organizing and retrieval of the information (Benjamin et al., 1981). Also,
anxiety may be expressed in a variety of avoidance behaviors at various stages
of the exam process. Academic procrastination is an outstanding form of
avoidance behavior characterizing test-anxious students (Solomon & Rothblum,
1984).
9
2.3 Determinants of Test Anxiety
If a student appreciates the situational demands of the testing process as
dangerous and exceeding his/her competence, the transaction between the
student and the test situation will be judged as anxiety-producing (Zeidner,
1998). It is expected that any aspect of the testing process (e.g., test difficulty)
LQFUHDVHVWKHSUREDELOLW\ RI IDLOXUH ZLOO DOVR LQFUHDVHWKHVWXGHQW¶V DSSUDLVDO RI
perceived threat in the test environment, thus increasing his/her anxiety (Lazarus
& Folkman, 1984, cited in Zeidner, 1998, pp. 171). This transaction shows that
there are situational and subjective determinants of test anxiety.
2.3.1 Situational Determinants
Students high in test anxiety usually perform as well as those low in test
anxiety if the situation is not evaluative or stressful (Wine, 1971). This means
only in evaluative situations, there is a difference in performance between high
test-anxious and low test-anxious individuals.
The difficulty of the task (i.e., test) is regarded to be a major source of
stress and anxiety 2¶1HLO 6SLHOEHUJHU DQG +DQVHQ IRXQG WKDW EORRG
pressure increased while students worked on difficult learning materials and
decreased when they responded to easy materials. The difficulty may not only
be due to the task, but also to other factors such as the ability of the student,
amount of preparation, and prior experience with the task in which a student will
be engaged (Zeidner, 1998).
Item order may also affect test anxiety. It has been found that when a test
is initially perceived as highly difficult, the presence of anxiety will be most
disruptive, and then the performance will be poorest. Covington and Omelich
(1987) reported that students who combine high anxiety and a lack of self-
confidence performed on hard test items poorly, especially when hard items
were placed first, compared to their counterparts who combine low anxiety and
high confidence.
10
Regarding test instructions, Williams (1976, cited in Wigfield & Eccles,
1989) reported that task instructions deemphasizing the evaluative nature of the
task improved the performance of anxious students, while instructions stressed
that the task is a test of ability hindered their performance. Furthermore, test
formats may affect high-test anxious students. A study by Green (1981)
examined whether preferences for different test formats (e.g., multiple-choice,
problem-solving, essay, interpretive exercise, completion, and true-false),
differed for students high and low in anxiety. It was found that groups high and
low in anxiety agreed on all preference ranks except essay and interpretive
exercise; the highly anxious group preferred interpretive exercises to essays.
Another study by Zeidner (1987) showed that school children viewed multiple-
choice tests as being less anxiety-producing than essay tests.
On the other hand, time pressure is an anxiety-evoking factor. Students
may note that the exam time is insufficient for them to answer all the exam
questions. This situation may lead them to think about the consequences of poor
achievement or failure, which may make them feel anxious. Plass and Hill
(1986) found that high-anxious boys performed poorly under time pressure
compared to their less anxious peers, whereas when time pressure was removed,
their performance improved significantly.
2.3.2 Subjective Determinants
Irrational beliefs and negative perceptions relating to the test situation are
considered to be sources of anxiety. When a student interprets the test situation
as threatening or challenging, he/she may feel uncomfortable and tense.
Accordingly, even if a student has adequately prepared for an exam, his/her
anxiety may result from negative thinking or worries such as focusing on how
friends and other classmates are doing, or on the negative consequences of
failure. A number of studies showed that anxious students emit more negative
self-statements and thoughts than non-anxious students. Hunsley (1987) found
11
that high levels of test anxiety were associated with frequent negative cognitions
during exams. Similarly, Galassi et al., (1981) reported that low test-anxious
students experienced more positive and fewer negative thoughts than high-test
anxious students. Zatz and Chassin (1983) found that high test-anxious subjects
reported more task-debilitating thoughts than either moderate- or low-anxious
subjects. Additionally, high-test anxious subjects reported fewer positive
evaluations that low test-anxious subjects.
Another determinant of test anxiety is study skills and test taking deficits.
Students with poor study skills and inefficient methods of preparation frequently
lack self-confidence and are anxious and tense before and during tests.
Desiderato and Koskinen (1969), Mitchell and Ng (1972), Wittmaier (1972) and
Onwueguzie and Daley (1996) reported that high-test anxious students had less
effective study skills than low-test anxious students. This implies that test
anxiety may stem from the lack of knowledge of the examination material
(Onwuegbuzie & Daley, 1996). A student perceives his/her ability to cope with
a test as unsatisfactory and is uncertain about the consequences of inadequate
coping (I. G. Sarason & Sarason, 1990). Thus, he/she experiences test anxiety,
because he/she does not feel sufficiently prepared as a result of having too few
or even no study skills and habits (Culler and Holahan 1980). In addition, low
level of intelligence may contribute to the initiation of test anxiety. A meta-
analytic study of 61 different studies based on 8438 subjects in grades 3-
postsecondary showed consistent correlation of -.23 between IQ and test anxiety
(Hembree, 1988). This indicates that high-test anxiety associates with low
intelligence.
Generally, anxiety-producing self-statements may result from irrational
EHOLHIVHJLI,GRQ¶WJHWDIXOOVFRUH,ZLOOEHZRUWKOHVVWKHSHUFHSWLRQRf test
VLWXDWLRQ DV WKUHDWHQLQJ HJWKH H[DP ZLOO EH GLIILFXOW IRU PH , GRQ¶W NQRZ
ZKHWKHU,¶OOGRZHOORU QRWDQGRUSRRU VWXG\KDELWVDQG VNLOOV HJ, IHHO,¶P
not well prepared for the exam, I may fail).
12
2.4 Gender Differences
Almost all investigations of gender differences in test anxiety indicate that
girls consistently show higher levels of anxiety than boys, especially in grades 5
to 10 (Hembree, 1988).
A study by Ahlawat (1989) investigated the sex differences in test anxiety
in a sample of 3,572 Jordanian high school and community college students. The
high school students were 1,014 males and 839 females studying in the 12th
grade. Community college students were 768 males and 951 females from both
the first and second years of the two-year community colleges. It was found that
the girls showed a tendency to score higher than the boys on the test anxiety
scale (The Jordanian Arabic version (Y-TAI) of the Test Anxiety Inventory
(TAI; Spielberger, 1980)).
A frequent interpretation of gender differences explains them in terms of
socialization differences. Girls are more emotional, have less self-control, and
disclose more personal information. Thus, they seem to admit anxiety more
quickly, considering that they, in comparison to boys, lose less regard when they
report their levels of anxiety. Also, girls are probably actually more affected by
the test situation and view this situation as anxiety-evoking, because they seem
to be more socially motivated (Rost & Schermer, 2001).
2.5 Correlates
Test situation usually results in varying degrees of anxiety. Also, it may
produce other emotional reactions such as low self-esteem, depression and anger
(Van der Ploeg, 1983). These reactions or responses may be related to test
anxiety. Numerous studies have investigated the relationships between test
anxiety and personality variables. These studies indicate that test anxiety is
significantly correlated with a variety of personal variables.
+HPEUHH¶V PHWD-analysis of 36 studies showed a strong inverse
correlation (r=-.42) between self-esteem and test anxiety. This indicates that
13
high-test anxious students have low self-esteem compared to their low-test
anxious peers. Additionally, it has been found that test anxiety is negatively
correlated with optimism. Students who are high in test anxiety are often
pessimistic regarding examination results. They expect that they will not get
good results (Carver & Scheier, 1989). Kleijn, Van der Ploeg and Topman
(1994) found inverse correlations between optimism and both worry (r=-.51)
and emotionality (r=-.44) subscales of test anxiety in a sample of first year
medical and biomedical students. This suggests that successful students feel
competent about fulfilling the demands of study and can handle test situations.
Anxious individuals are usually worried about future events, which may
or may not occur. Depressed individuals, on the other hand, are usually sad as a
result of perceived losses in the past (Beck & Emory, 1985). However, both
anxious and depressed persons are engaged in negative self-talk. This may
suggest that test anxiety and depression are related. Comunian (1989) found a
FRUUHODWLRQRIEHWZHHQVFRUHVRQWKH7HVW$Q[LHW\,QYHQWRU\DQG&KLOGUHQ¶V
Depression Scale in a sample of 200 Italian high school students.
Some circumstances may facilitate the development of angry feelings
during exams. These circumstances include poor organization of the
examination, lack of facilities and getting a bad grade (Van der Ploeg, 1983). A
study by Van der Ploeg (1983) examined the relationship between test anxiety
and anger in a sample of 184 second year medical students in Holland. Results
showed that test anxiety was more strongly correlated with trait anger (r= .24)
than with state anger (r= .12). When the relationships between these variables
were examined in a second administration of the scales in a sample of 82
medical students, the correlations between test anxiety and both trait (r= .43) and
state anger (r= .35) were higher.
Regarding self-handicapping, Smith, Snyder and Handelsman (1982)
found that high-test anxious individuals used reports of lowered effort in a self-
handicapping pattern. Harris, Snyder, Higgins and Schrag (1986) investigated
14
the differential contributions of test anxiety and other personality variables to
self-handicapping in a sample of 104 undergraduate women in high-evaluative
stress condition and in low-HYDOXDWLYH VWUHVV FRQGLWLRQ 6XEMHFWV¶ OHYHO RI WHVW
anxiety was a reliable predictor of anticipated effort; high test-anxious subjects
anticipated expending less effort.
2.6 Consequences
Seipp (1991) conducted a series of meta-analyses (126 studies published
from 1975 to 1988) to reveal the strength of the relationship between anxiety
and performance. He found a negative correlation (r= -.21) between the two
variables. This means that high-test anxiety accompanies poor performance.
Another important result (see Tryon, 1980 & Küpfer, 1997) is that the cognitive
component of test anxiety, the worry, is negatively correlated with performance,
whereas the emotional component, the emotionality, is not. High test-anxious
students show autonomic activity similar to low test-anxious students in testing
situations. Thus, negative thinking about exams may impair test performance
much more than perception of the physiological arousal. Research shows that
there are two models for explaining the relationship between test anxiety and
performance: the interference model and the skills-deficit model. In the
following, the basic assumptions of the interference model will be outlined.
Then, the skills-deficit model will be presented.
2.6.1 Interference Model
Sometimes students find it difficult to remember the answers of some
questions during an exam, but when they leave the exam room, they can easily
retrieve the information related to these questions. From the interference model
point of view, the effect of test anxiety on performance occurs in the testing
VLWXDWLRQ 7KDW LV DQ[LHW\ GXULQJ WHVWV LQWHUIHUHV ZLWK WKH VWXGHQW¶V DELOLW\ WR
retrieve and use information that is known well (Culler & Holahan, 1980).
15
Accordingly, anxiety hinders the individual from utilizing or developing task-
relevant knowledge or skills (Hodapp & Henneberger, 1983). The roots of the
interference model go back to the beginnings of the empirical test anxiety
research. Mandler and S. B. Sarason (1952) put forward the central hypotheses
of the interference theory, which was later presented by Wine (1971, 1980) in
the framework of attentional theory. These both interference beginnings will be
presented in the following in more detail.
2.6.1.1 Interference Theory by Mandler and S. B. Sarason
Mandler and Sarason (1952) presented an interpretation of the difference
in performance based on the learned psychological drives. They assumed that in
test situations, two kinds of learned drives are typically effective: task drives and
anxiety drives. The task drives stimulate behaviors to complete the task. These
behaviors are activated in a given situation through setting of tasks and the
expectations of individuals. The anxiety drives include all anxiety reactions,
which have so far been learned in similar test situations. These drives primarily
produce such reactions, so that they lead to anxiety reduction. In this regard,
Mandler and Sarason proposed that these drives stimulate two opposite and
incompatible behaviors: (a) Task-relevant reactions that directly contribute to
task completion, thus reducing the anxiety. (b) Task-irrelevant reactions, which
are not specifically linked with the requirements of the task. They can manifest
as feelings of incompetence, helplessness, somatic reactions, anticipation of
punishment or loss of self-worth as well as implicit attempts to avoid the test
situations. It is here a matter of self-centered reactions, which impair task
performance.
2.6.1.2 Attentional Interpretation by Wine
Wine (1971) suggested that the debilitating effects of test anxiety on
performance might have an attentional explanation. To put it more clearly, high-
16
test anxious student attends to both self-relevant and task-relevant variables in
contrast to the low test-anxious student who attends mostly to task-relevant
variables. Thus, according to the cognitive attentional model of test anxiety
proposed by Wine, task performance is impaired by worry, negative self-
statements, and task-irrelevant thoughts. This model may propose cognitive-
attentional training to help anxious individuals focus their attention on the work
at hand.
2.6.2 Skills-Deficit Model
Researchers who support this model (e.g. Desiderato & Kokinen, 1969;
Wittmaier, 1972; Culler & Holahan, 1980) assume that poor performance in
exams is mainly attributed to inefficient preparation caused by poor study-
related behavior. Students characterized by poor study skills and habits are well
aware of their poor preparation for the exam, and thus adapt low self-
expectations for success. This increases anxiety relating to the exam, which, in
turn, impairs performance. Consequently, when students feel or perceive that
their study skills are insufficient, they may become anxious and then perform
poorly. High-test anxious students have less study skills than low-test anxious
students. As a result, they are less prepared for exams. According to this model,
study skills training and training would be proposed to help test anxious students
with poor study skills be self-confident in test situations.
2.7 Diagnosis
Qualitative and quantitative diagnoses are possible through physiological
measurements, self-references (free stories, questionnaires, etc.) as well as
by means of observation or estimates done by teachers, parents and classmates.
In the diagnosis of test anxiety, the classical questionnaires, which are
very economic and preferred in the research, dominate as a diagnostic tool. The
traditional questionnaires concentrate nearly exclusively on the anxiety
17
reactions of individuals and don't pay enough attention to the other aspects of
anxiety (i.e., initiation of anxiety, coping with anxiety and anxiety
stability)(Rost & Schermer, 1987).
The present questionnaires are regarded as being of little relevance to the
field of counseling and clinical psychology, because they allow knowing the
presence of test anxiety, but don't offer relevant information for counseling.
Therefore, it has frequently been gone back to the clinical interview, which can
be seen as a search pattern for relevant information for intervention. Whether
and to which extent the functional relationships can be uncovered through the
clinical interviews strongly depends, as in all interviews, on the experience and
the psychological and social competence of counselors, school psychologists or
therapists (Rost & Schermer, 2001).
(a) Procedures with uni-dimensional evaluation. Most test anxiety
questionnaires show only the level of anxiety, although since the 1950's there
have been indications to multi-dimensional structures. Rost and Schermer
(2001) viewed such questionnaires as not consistent with the current stand of
NQRZOHGJHDQGWKH\VKRXOGQ¶WEHXVHGDQ\PRUHIRUFRXQVHOLQJ purposes.
(b) Procedures with bi-dimensional evaluation. It is clear that a one-dimensional
description to the complexity of the phenomenon of test anxiety is not adequate.
State-trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) makes a distinction between state test
anxiety >I feel now, i.e., in the moment, tense @and trait test anxiety >I generally
feel tense@,W KRZHYHU GRHVQ¶WIXUWKHUGLYLGHWKH FRQVWUXFW LWVHOI7KHGLYLVLRQ
of test anxiety by Liebert and Morris (1967) into a worry component and an
emotionality component is more fruitful.
Procedures with multi-dimensional evaluation. All modern questionnaires
of test anxiety include (at least) the both components- worry and emotionality.
+RGDSS¶V WHVW DQ[LHW\ LQYHQWRU\ ZKLFK LV UHVWULFWHG WR WKH UHDFWLRQ
18
aspHFW FRQWDLQV LQ DGGLWLRQ WR HPRWLRQDOLW\ ,¶P H[FLWHG DQG ZRUU\ , WKLQN
about the consequences of a possible failure) both lack of confidence >,¶P
confident of my performance@and interference >sudden thoughts interfere with
my concentration@. Also, the inventory developed by I. G. Sarason (1984)
consists of four factors, namely worry, irrelevant thoughts, strain, and physical
symptoms. Rost and Schermer (1992) considered this procedure as neither
theoretically nor psychometrically convincing.
So far a precise analysis of test anxiety can be examined only with the
Differential Test Anxiety Inventory by Rost and Schermer (1997). It is a multi-
faceted inventory that includes in addition to the manifestations of test anxiety
(physiological >If I experience test anxiety, I start to sweat@;emotional>If I
experience test anxiety, I feel useless@; cognitive >If I experience test anxiety, I
IRUJHW WKLQJ ,¶YH DOUHDG\OHDUQHG @) three typical factors of the initiation of test
anxiety (repertory uncertainty >I experience anxiety, because I have difficulties
in finding the right way of preparing for a test@; lack of knowledge >I experience
anxiety, when I realize that my knowledge is insufficient@, recitation situations >I
experience anxiety, to recite something in front of class@. It also includes two
stability conditions of test anxiety (external stability >Others take great
consideration in my anxiety@and internal stability >The idea that I could fail
takes grasp of me and then never lets me go@) as well as four coping strategies
with test anxiety (danger control >To cope with my anxiety, I review the
subjects@; situation control >To cope with my anxiety, I rely on cheating@;
anxiety control >To cope with my anxiety, I try to do something against my
tension@; anxiety repression >To cope with my anxiety, I say to myself that
VFKRROLVQ¶WWKDWLPSRUWDQW@).
19
2.8 Coping
The literature shows that several techniques and programs have been used
in attempts to treat test anxiety, including cognitive techniques, which focus on
the worry component, behavioral techniques, which focus on the emotionality
component, cognitive-behavioral techniques, which focus on both components,
study skills training, which aims to teach students how to study and prepare for
exams, in addition to combined programs. However, until now there is no single
theory, technique or program that can be regarded as the most appropriate option
for school counselors in reducing test anxiety and enhancing performance of
students.
Rost and Schermer (2001) suggested that prevention and treatment of test
DQ[LHW\ VKRXOG EH GLYLGHG LQWR WKUHH FRPSRQHQWV ³WHDFKHUV DQG VFKRRO´
³VWXGHQW¶VSHUVRQDOLW\´DQG³SDUHQW¶VKRXVH´
(a) In the field of school and classes, there are procedures to be considered,
which reduce danger and build success-oriented expectations. The initiation of
test anxiety can be prevented through the extensive use of freedom in
classrooms. In addition to creating an emotional and warm atmosphere, it is
important to think about defusing crisis situations (such as starting school, or
transition to a secondary school), about defusing threatening situations relating
to performance and tests, and about optimizing the learning process in classes.
(b) The classical technique of behavioral therapy for reducing test anxiety is
systematic desensitization, which can be used in combination with positive
reinforcement for successful coping with anxiety-producing situations. Its use
alone is no longer supported as a method for treating test anxiety, because the
optimization of coping strategies remains unconsidered. Also, since test anxiety
is negatively correlated with performance, counseling and therapy should always
be done through procedures for the acquisition of study skills, if necessary, in
20
connection with private tuition, to compensate the lack of knowledge, and hence
make it possible to get high scores, increase self-confidence and self-esteem.
Other treatment approaches have emphasized the cognitive aspects, which
LQFOXGH RQH¶V PRWLYDWLRQ SURFHVVHV of thinking and problem solving. In this
respect, the strategies of attention, self-assertion and attribution can increase
self-confidence and realistically evaluate the own abilities as well as
performance possibilities (cognitive therapy).
(c) The reactLRQ WR SHUIRUPDQFH VLWXDWLRQV LQ WKH SDUHQW¶V KRXVH KDV D FUXFLDO
part in the stability of test anxiety. Above all, this problem can be dealt with
WKURXJKLQWHQVLI\LQJWKHFRPPXQLFDWLRQDQGFRRSHUDWLRQEHWZHHQSDUHQW¶VKRXVH
and school. The parents should regularly discuss the school situation openly and
free from personal devaluation and to act in solidarity with their child. Parental
reactions to performance and school behavior of their child should be
appropriately constant. They should regard their child as an independent
personality and not to view him as a model of their own self-image (child should
realize, what his parents wish), because he comes under severe performance
pressure, by asking or expecting too much of his intellectual abilities.
3. Academic Procrastination
3.1 Definition
I begin by explaining the concepts of general, decisional and behavioral
procrastination, then move on to academic procrastination.
3.1.1 Procrastination
There is no doubt that occasional postponements of tasks or assignments
are acceptable. All students may sometimes find themselves obliged to put off
their tasks until later, especially when unexpected circumstances occur, because
21
of which they have to make some changes in their work plans. However, some
people frequently postpone completing their tasks, which may make them feel
guilty as a result of wasting time and losing opportunities. This frequent
postponement has been viewed as problematic and termed procrastination, as an
area of investigation.
Procrastination has been defined as a tendency to delay tasks that should
be completed (Lay, 1986). Ellis and Knaus (1977, cited in Ferrari, Johnson &
McCown, 1995, pp. 72) viewed procrastination as a habit or trait, stemming
mainly from self-defeating thoughts. They labeled it as the phenomenon of
delaying task completion to the point of experiencing subjective discomfort.
Compulsive or dysfunctional procrastination is defined as decisional and
behavioral procrastination in the same person (Ferrari, 1991). Decisional
procrastination is defined as the purposive delay in making decisions within
some specific time frame (Ferrari, 1994). Janis and Mann (1977) regarded this
type of procrastination as a cognitive response pattern causing an individual
discomfort because of the delay. The decisional procrastinator might claim a
tendency toward forgetfulness and absentmindedness. Behavioral
procrastination, on the other hand, refers to the tendency to postpone most
everyday tasks (Lay, 1988). This delay is meant to protect a vulnerable self-
esteem (Burka & Yuen, 1983, cited in Ferrari, 1991). Behavioral procrastinators
view their self-worth as based solely on their ability to perform. By avoiding
WDVNFRPSOHWLRQSURFUDVWLQDWRUV¶DFWXDOLQDELOLW\DWWKHWDVNLVQHYHUWHVWHGWKH\
may maintain an illusion concerning their task ability (Ferrari, 1994). That is,
for them, it is better to do nothing than risk failure and look foolish (Ferrari,
1992).
Procrastinatory behavior may be due to fear of failure or fear of success.
Some procrastinatory behavior may represent a form of rebellion to those in
authority (Burka and Yuen 1983, cited in Lay, 1986). Ellis and Knaus (1977,
cited in Rorer, 1983) offered some interpretations of procrastinatory behavior:
22
First, it can be viewed as a reaction to fear of failure or rejection. Second, it may
EHDUHVXOWRIRQH¶VXQZLOOLQJQHVVWRDFWRQXQSOHDVDQWRUGLIILFXOWWDVNV7KLUGLW
may be a response to unfair treatment by others toward oneself. Thus, the causes
of procrastination may be different from one person to another, or from one
group to another.
3.1.2 Academic Procrastination
Academic procrastination has received a great interest from researchers,
because of the obvious negative consequences of procrastination for millions of
students, and the availability of these students for research and treatment
(Milgram, Gehrman & Keinan, 1992). Delaying academic tasks is a common
practice among college students. It was found that nearly one fourth of all
university students reported problems with procrastination on such academic
tasks as writing term papers, studying for exams, and keeping up with weekly
readings (Solomon & Rothblum 1984). Rothblum, Solomon and Murakami
(1986) defined academic procrastination as the (a) self-reported tendency to put
off academic tasks nearly always or always and (b) to experience nearly always
or always problematic levels of anxiety associated with this procrastination.
They considered that self-reported procrastination must include both frequent
delay and considerable anxiety.
There is evidence that tendency for students to procrastinate increases the
longer they are in college. That is, freshmen procrastinate the least; seniors, the
most (Semb, Glick & Spencer 1979, cited in Solomon & Rothblum, 1984). It
has also been found that there are differences between academic procrastinators
in their attribution of academic performance. High procrastinators attribute their
good test performance to luck or situational factors (external attributions),
whereas low procrastinators attribute success on a test to effort or ability
(internal attributions) (Rothblum et al., 1986).
23
3.2 Manifestations
What can be observed in procrastinating students is that they delay in
beginning or completing academic assignments until a later date (Ferrari et al.,
1995). For example, rather than studying regularly during the semester, they
begin studying just a few days before exams. This means that they begin
studying later than it would be optimal. Milgram, Stroloff and Resenbaum
(1988) suggested thaW WKLV GHOD\PLJKWEH EHFDXVH WKHLUVWXG\EHKDYLRU GRHVQ¶W
accord with their stated intentions, or because their intention to begin studying is
delayed. Accordingly, both an intention-behavior discrepancy and a lack of
promptness in intending to perform and performing study assignments may be
observed. Additionally, procrastinating students are easily distracted toward
activities other than studying (e.g., recreational or sport activities) (Ferrari et al.,
1995). Some procrastinating students, especially those who procrastinate as a
response to fear of failure, are careful to let the others see them or know about
them, when they spend a lot of their time doing activities other than studying. In
doing so, these students want to send a message to the people whom they know
WKDWLIWKH\KDYHQ¶WSDVVHGWKHH[DPVWKLVGRHVQ¶WPHDQWKDWWKH\DUHXQDEOHRU
XQLQWHOOLJHQWEXWPHDQVWKDWWKH\KDYHQ¶WSDVVHGEHFDXVHWKH\KDYHQ¶WVWXGLHG
Therefore, when they get their exam results, it would be less embarrassing for
them to talk about their academic performance, if poor, compared to their peers,
who study hard and perform poorly.
3.3 Determinants
Of course, procrastinatory behavior can be explained in terms of several
psychological theories, especially the psychoanalytic, psychodynamic,
behavioral and cognitive theories.
24
3.3.1 Psychoanalytic Theories
According to the psychoanalytic theories, procrastination results
essentially from anxiety. Freud (1953, cited in Ferrari et al., 1995, pp. 22)
illuminated the role of anxiety in avoidance behavior. He believed that anxiety
was a warning signal to the ego of repressed unconscious material that could be
disruptive. As soon as the ego identifies anxiety, it institutes a large array of
defenses. The Freudian concepts of dynamic defenses and task avoidance argue
that tasks that are not completed are avoided primarily because they are
threatening to the ego.
3.3.2 Psychodynamic Theories
These theories asserted the role of authoritarian parenting in the
development of procrastination. Spock (1971, cited in Ferrari et al., 1995, pp.
24) argued that unconscious feelings of parental anger express themselves when
children fail at parentally imposed tasks. Children unconsciously respond to this
anger by demonstrating a delay of future goal-oriented behavior. When adults
raised under these conditions encounter a task requiring a significant degree of
achievement, they unconsciously recall the parental conflict. They respond to
this unconscious memory and subsequent resentment by attempting to thwart the
wishes of the parental figure that is imposing the achievement-oriented task. The
result is that they find themselves chronically unable to finish any task that is
indicative of the early childhood conflicts between themselves and their parents.
3.3.3 Behavioral Theories
The behavioral theories explain procrastinatory behavior in terms of
environment and previous experiences. Procrastinating students already learned
to postpone completing their academic tasks, especially if these tasks are
unpleasant, and to direct their attention towards other activities that are
interesting for them. This behavior has been reinforced by students themselves,
25
WKHLU SHHUV RU WKHLU VRFLDO HQYLURQPHQW $W WKH VDPH WLPH LW KDVQ¶W EHHQ
punished. Therefore, it has become habitual over time.
3.3.4 Cognitive Theories
According to the cognitive theories, procrastinatory behavior stems from
irrational beliefs or negative self-VWDWHPHQWV VXFK DV ³, VWLOO KDYH PXFK WLPH
ahead, I will begin preparing for the exams laWHU´ RU ³, FDQ UHDG WKH ZKROH
PDWHULDO WKH QLJKW EHIRUH WKH H[DP VR , GRQ¶W QHHG WR EHJLQ SUHSDULQJ QRZ´
Also, some students behave irrationally, when they view their self-worth as
based only on task ability, and avoid completing tasks, so that they don¶WJLYHD
chance to others to test or know their actual inability at the tasks. Solomon and
Rothblum (1984) investigated academic procrastination in 342 college students.
7KH\SHUIRUPHG DIDFWRUDQDO\VLVRIVXEMHFWV¶UHDVRQVIRUSURFUDVWLQDWLRQ7KH\
found that students engaged in frequent procrastination for two major reasons:
fear of failure and task-aversiveness. They also found that the difference
between students who procrastinated because of aversiveness of the task and
those who procrastinated because of fear of failure was that the latter also
reported high anxiety and low self-esteem. This reflects the role of negative self-
statements in inducing procrastination, and other related personality disorders
(e.g., high anxiety, low self-esteem and fear of failure).
3.4 Consequences
It is quite clear that when students frequently postpone their academic
tasks until a later date, these tasks will accumulate in the future, because during
the semester new assignments will be required. Thus, while preparing for a
particular exam, they may not be able to study all of the material a few days
before the exam; this could lead them to focus on some parts and ignore the
others. Insufficient preparation will most likely result in poor achievement. As it
is known, when students perform poorly in their exams, it has a negative effect
26
on them. They may lose the opportunity to continue their studies in the fields
that they like or to get the jobs that they want and other possible losses.
Furthermore, procrastinating students may feel guilty for taking so much of their
time away from studying and doing other activities. Feeling guilty and worried
about losing opportunities and wasting time may lead to other emotional
disorders such as depression or anxiety. This may negatively impact their
families and their relationships with others. It should be pointed out that
SURFUDVWLQDWLRQFDQDIIHFWDOODVSHFWVRI WKHVWXGHQWV¶OLYHVDFDGHPLFSHUVRQDO
social).
3.5 Correlates
Research has shown that there are significant correlations between
procrastination and a variety of personality variables such as trait anxiety, low
self-confidence and self-esteem, lack of energy, disorganization,
noncompetitiveness, depression, neurosis, and forgetfulness (Solomon &
Rothblum, 1984; Beswick, Rothblum & Mann, 1988; Effert & Ferrari, 1989). In
the following, I present the results of some studies investigating the relationship
of procrastination to other personality variables.
A study by Aitken (1982) showed that academic procrastination was
correlated with self-concept (r= -.42) and impulsivity (r= .21). McCown, Petzel,
and Rupert (1987) reported a correlation of .60 between academic
procrastination and extraversion. Lay (1986) found that procrastination was
strongly correlated with organization (r= -.49) and neurotic disorganization (r=
.69) in a sample of 76 university students. Ferrari (1991) explored whether low
self-esteem and high social anxiety promoted the choice of an environmental
performance obstacle more by procrastinators than nonprocrastinators as an
attempt to protect social and self-esteems in a sample of 120 female college
students. Female procrastinators (n= 57) self-reported significantly lower self-
esteems than female nonprocrastinators (n=63). Also, procrastinators (49.1%)
27
were more likely than nonprocrastinators (30.2%) to self-handicap.
Procrastinators compared to nonprocrtastinators self-reported significantly more
self-awareness, self-presentation, and self-handicapping tendencies. Another
study by Ferrari (1992) examined the relationships between procrastination,
perfectionism and self-consciousness in a sample of male (n= 103) and female
(n= 204) college undergraduates. Results showed that procrastination was
correlated with perfectionism (r= .34), private self-consciousness (.21), public
self-consciousness (.31), and self-handicapping (.30). Weigand (2001) found a
correlation of -.32 between procrastination and satisfaction with study in a
sample of 505 university students.
3.6 Diagnosis
A number of inventories have been developed in the field of academic
procrastination either to differentiate between high procrastinators and low
procrastinators, or to explore the reasons for procrastination and frequency of
procrastination. The most widely used inventories are: Aitken Procrastination
Inventory (API), Procrastination Assessment Scale-Students (PASS) and
Tuckman Procrastination Scale (TPS).
Aitken (1982, cited in Ferrari et al, 1995, pp. 52) Procrastination
Inventory (API) was developed to differentiate chronic procrastinators from
nonprocrastinators among college undergraduates. This inventory consists of 19
items interspersed through a larger body of 52 items. Each statement is rated
along a 5-point scale from False (1) to True (5).
Another scale of procrastination is Procrastination Assessment Scale-
Students (PASS), developed by Solomon and Rothblum (1984) to explore
procrastination on academic tasks. The PASS consists of two parts. The first part
assesses the prevalence of procrastination in six areas of academic functioning:
(1) writing a term paper, (2) studying for an exam, (3) keeping up with weekly
reading assignments, (4) performing administrative tasks, (5) attending meeting,
28
and (6) performing academic tasks in general. Subjects are asked to indicate on a
5-point Likert scale the degree to which they procrastinate on the task (1= never
procrastinate; 5= always procrastinate) and the degree to which procrastination
on the task is a problem for them (1=not at all a problem; 5=always a problem).
Additionally, subjects are asked to indicate on a 5-piont Likert scale the extent
to which they want to decrease their procrastination behavior on each academic
task (1= do not want to decrease; 5=definitely want to decrease).
The second part of the PASS presents the respondent with a
procrastination scenario (e.g., delay in writing a term paper) and then lists a
variety of possible reasons for procrastination on the task: (1) evaluation
anxiety, (2) perfectionism, (3) difficulty making decisions, (4) dependency and
help seeking, (5) aversiveness of the task and low frustration tolerance, (6) lack
of self-confidence, (7) laziness, (8) lack of assertion, (9) fear of success, (10)
tendency to feel overwhelmed and poorly manage time, (11) rebellion against
control, (12) risk-taking, and (13) peer influence. Two statements are listed for
each of these reasons, and students are asked to rate each statement on a 5-point
Likert scale according to how much it reflects why they procrastinated the last
time they were in this situation.
The Tuckman (1991, cited in Ferrari et al, 1995, pp. 54) Procrastination
Scale (TPS) was developed to detect whether undergraduates tend to
procrastinate at completing college requirements. The TPS provides a general
index of academic procrastination resultiQJ IURP D VWXGHQW¶V DELOLW\ WR VHOI-
regulate or control task schedules. This scale is actually 16 items embedded
among 35 items regarding academic behaviors. Tuckman (1991) suggested that
SURFUDVWLQDWLRQLV FDXVHG E\ D FRPELQDWLRQ RI RQH¶V GLVEHOLHIW KDWK eorsheis
capable of performing tasks well, inability to postpone gratification, and
frequent assignment of blame to external sources for life predicaments.
29
3.7 Coping
Most studies that examined the effectiveness of treatment methods for
reducing procrastination remain unpublished. Therefore, it is difficult to know
through too few studies available, which techniques are more efficient in coping
with procrastination.
A study by Ziesat, Rosenthal and White (1978) investigated the effects of
stimulus control, self-reinforcement, and a combination of the two on a sample
of 56 college students who procrastinated in studying. Students were given
either behavioral self-control training or a nondirective, attention-placebo
control procedure. Experimental clients were exposed to training in either
stimulus control, self-reinforcement, or a combination of the two. Half of these
clients used self-punishment; half did not. Half were trained individually and
half in groups of four. Regarding reported amount and attitudes toward studying,
experimental clients improved, whereas control clients did not. However, there
were no significant differences among experimental subconditions. Neither
control nor experimental conditions resulted in any significant change in over-all
grade point average.
Richards (1975) investigated the efficacy of two behavioral self-control
procedures as additions to study skills advice in modifying behavior of studying
in a sample of 108 college students. Results indicated that self-monitoring was
an effective treatment addition to study skills advice and stimulus control was
not. All of the combined treatment groups were superior to the controls that
were equivalent. Treatment effects were equivalent for good and poor students,
and most students felt that the treatment had helped them significantly with the
improvement of their study habits.
Green (1982) examined the effects of self-monitoring alone and self-
monitoring plus self-reward on three academic and three related procrastinative
behaviors of six academically disadvantaged minority college students. Results
showed that subjects could self-monitor consistently and accurately and self-
30
reward frequently the occurrences of their academic behaviors. Self-monitoring
alone did not reduce academic or procrastinative behaviors. A combination of
self-monitoring and self-reward was effective in producing substantial increases
in academic behaviors and grades and in producing decreases in related
procrastinative behaviors.
Wright and Strong (1982) examined whether directives that tell clients
exactly what to do stimulate defiance, and those that give clients a choice of
what to do stimulate compliance; also they investigated whether the therapeutic
change can be facilitated by directing clients to maintain their undesired
behaviors. 20 college student procrastinators were given 2 interviews in which
interviewers directed them either to continue to procrastinate exactly as they had
been doing or to choose some of their procrastination behaviors to continue. 10
other procrastinating students did not receive interviews. Subjects who were
interviewed, including those who were directed to maintain their procrastination,
decreased procrastination dramatically, whereas those not interviewed did not.
4. Test Anxiety and Procrastination
Previous research indicates that there is a relationship between test
anxiety and academic procrastination. A study by Rothblum, Solomon and
Murakami (1986), in a sample of 379 university students, showed that high
procrastinators, particularly women, were significantly more likely than were
low procrastinators to report more test anxiety, weekly state anxiety, and weekly
anxiety-related physical symptoms. Another study by Weigand (2001) examined
the relationship between test anxiety and academic procrastination in a sample
of 505 university students. Results showed that procrastination was correlated
with the repertory uncertainty (r=41), danger control (r=-.35), situation control
(r=28) and cognitive manifestation (r=23) subscales of the Differential Test
Anxiety Inventory.
31
5. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Study Skills Training
In this section, I begin by explaining the concept of cognitive behavioral
therapy, and present a number of studies that examined its effectiveness in
reducing test anxiety, then move on to study skills training.
5.1 Cognitive Behavioral Therapy
Cognitive behavioral therapy is based on the idea that the way we think
about things affects how we feel (Goldfried & Davison, 1976), our feelings are
not just automatic responses to events, they are shaped by the beliefs and
thoughts that we have (Wells, 2001). The therapist works with clients to help
them recognize the cognitions and other factors that cause problems for the
clients, to test the validity of the beliefs and thoughts that prove important, and
to make the needed changes in both cognition and behavior (Freeman, Pretzer,
Fleming, & Simon, 1990). In this way, clients can explore the connections
between how they think, how they feel and how they behave. They become
aware of their negative self-statements, and learn how to dispute and replace
these statements with rational ones.
Thus, cognitive behavioral therapy aims to help clients to think
appropriately and enable them to cope effectively with their emotional disorders.
Each element of the structure of cognitive behavioral therapy sessions is
designed to increase the collaboration between therapist and clients while
ZRUNLQJ HIIHFWLYHO\ WRZDUG WKH FOLHQWV¶ JRDOV )UHHPDQ HW DO %HFN
(1970) defined the term cognitive therapy in two ways: In a broad sense, any
technique is directed toward modification of faulty or irrational patterns of
WKLQNLQJ LQ D QDUURZ VHQVH D VHW RI RSHUDWLRQV IRFXVHG RQ FOL HQW¶VFRJQLWLRQV
and on the assumptions and attitudes underlying these cognitions.
Regarding the reduction of test anxiety, cognitive behavioral therapy is
aimed at replacing anxiety-evoking thoughts with thoughts that facilitate task
attending. Several experimental studies investigated the effectiveness of
32
cognitive methods in reducing test anxiety and improving academic
performance. Although cognitive procedures do seem to reduce test anxiety
rather consistently, they are less consistent in improving academic performance.
This may be due to the difference in the procedures used in the experiments, the
selected samples, the qualifications and experience of the experimenters or other
factors.
A study by Meichenbaum (1972) examined the relative efficacy of group
cognitive modification treatment and group desensitization in reducing test
anxiety in a sample of 21 volunteer subjects ranging in age from 17 to 25 years.
The cognitive modification group combined an insight-oriented therapy with a
modified desensitization procedure. Results indicated that the cognitive
modification therapy was most effective in significantly reducing test anxiety.
Additionally, the cognitive modification group showed the most significant
performance improvement on grade point average.
Hahnloser (1974) examined the relative effectiveness of cognitive
restructuring and progressive relaxation in reducing test anxiety in a sample of
45 college students. The treatment groups met for four one-hour sessions. The
results suggested that all three treatment approaches led to significant decreases
in anxiety levels when compared with the waiting list control group.
Comparisons among the treatment groups indicated that a treatment approach,
which combines a cognitive-attentional restructuring process with training in
progressive relaxation, seems to be most effective in reducing test anxiety.
McMillan (1974) examined the effects of desensitization, rational emotive
therapy, and a combination of these approaches for the reduction of test-anxiety
among 84 female university students with high versus moderate levels of
general anxiety. The results showed that rational emotive therapy and
desensitization were equally effective in reducing the self-reports of test-anxiety
for high and moderate general anxiety students. There was no difference
between treatment and control subjects with regard to academic performance.
33
Osarchuk (1976) investigated the effectiveness of self-control
desensitization, rational restructuring, a combination of self-control
desensitization and rational restructuring in reducing test anxiety. 49 test
anxious students were assigned to one of four treatment groups: self-control
desensitization, rational restructuring, combined self-control
desensitization/rational restructuring, or an attention placebo. Results showed
that all groups demonstrated equally large reductions in test anxiety on the
assessment given immediately after the termination of treatment, while only the
three active therapy groups maintained this reduction after two months.
However, no differences in the effectiveness of the active procedures were
found at either post therapy assessment.
Holroyd (1976) assessed the comparative effectiveness of cognitive
therapy, systematic desensitization, a combination of cognitive therapy and
systematic desensitization in reducing test anxiety in a sample of 48 test-anxious
volunteers. Subjects were assigned randomly to one of two therapists, who
provided (1) cognitive therapy, (2) systematic desensitization, (3) a combination
of cognitive therapy and systematic desensitization, and (4) a pseudotherapy
control procedure. 12 subjects were also assigned to a waiting-list control group.
The results indicated that cognitive therapy was more effective in reducing
anxiety and improving grade point average than the other treatment and control
procedures.
In a study by Finger and Galassi (1977), 40 test-anxious students were
assigned randomly to one of four groups: an attentional treatment, in which
attention to task-relevant activities was reinforced; a relaxation treatment, in
which relaxation responses were reinforced; a combined attentional-relaxation
treatment; and a waiting-list control group. It was found that all treatments
affected significant changes on measures of worry, emotionality, and
debilitating anxiety. However, they failed to affect significant changes in both
facilitating anxiety and performance.
34
A study by Fabick (1977) examined the relative effectiveness of
systematic desensitization, cognitive modification, and mantra meditation in the
reduction of test anxiety in a sample of 21 college students. 7 students were
assigned to each of the three treatment groups. All three treatments were on
audiotape and administered by a treatment administrator not the investigator
himself. For the three groups, treatment consisted of two sessions of about an
hour and a half duration each. These were spaced one week apart. Posttesting
was accomplished one week after the second treatment session. Results
indicated that all three treatments significantly reduced test anxiety and general
anxiety. The meditation group, however, showed a significantly greater score
reduction from pretest to posttest than the other two groups.
Katz (1978) investigated the effectiveness of rational emotive therapy
(RET) and relaxation placebo in the treatment of test anxiety in a sample of 30
undergraduate students. The subjects were randomly assigned to one of three
treatment conditions: (a) rational-emotive therapy (RET), which emphasized
making subjects aware of both their own anxiety-evoking self-verbalizations and
ways they might counter such verbalizations, (b) relaxation placebo (RP), which
emphasized the mastery of skills in progressive deep muscle relaxation, and (c)
a no-treatment (NT) condition. The data from this investigation showed that
RET was significantly more effective in reducing test anxiety than either NT or
RP.
A study by Hymen and Warren (1978) evaluated the efficacy of rational-
emotive imagery as a component of rational-emotive therapy in the treatment of
test anxiety in college students. 11 volunteers met for six 1-hour group treatment
sessions over a 3-week period. After two initial treatment sessions subjects were
randomly assigned to groups given either rational-emotive therapy with rational-
emotive imagery or rational-emotive therapy without imagery. There were no
statistical differences between groups on test anxiety and performance measures.
Failure to find differences was attributed to similarities in content of treatment
35
sessions and short treatment time. Combined groups showed significant within-
group improvement on these measures.
Vagg (1978) examined the efficacy of biofeedback and cognitive coping
strategies in reducing test anxiety when time-limited, individual therapy was
used. The study was intended to determine if there was any differential effect on
outcome because of the sex of the experimenter. 32 test-anxious undergraduates
were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: biofeedback in combination
with cognitive coping, biofeedback only, cognitive coping only, or no treatment
control. Each member of the three treatment groups met with the same
experimenter in the same room for 60-90 minutes for seven consecutive weeks.
The results indicated that the two groups that received cognitive coping training
showed significant reductions in test anxiety. There were no statistically
significant differences for the sex of the experimenter.
A study by Goldfried, Linehan and Smith (1978) compared two
procedures for reducing test anxiety with a waiting list control condition in a
sample of 36 university students. In the first, systematic rational restructuring,
participants were trained to realistically reevaluate imaginally presented test-
taking situations. In the second, a prolonged exposure condition, the same
hierarchy items were presented, but with no instructions for coping cognitively.
Rational restructuring was more effective in reducing test anxiety, followed by
the prolonged exposure. There were no changes for the waiting-list control.
Another study by Kaplan, McCordick and Twitchell (1979) examined the
efficacy of (1) desensitization only (2) cognitive component only, (3) the
combination of cognitive component and desensitization in reducing test anxiety
in 24 college students. Results indicated that the cognitive component of
MeLFKHQEDXP¶VFRJQLWLYH-behavior modification was more effective than
the desensitization component or the combination of cognitive and
desensitization.
36
Also, Leal, Baxter, Martin and Marx (1981) examined the effects of
cognitive modification and systematic desensitization on the treatment of test
anxiety. 30 10th grade test anxious students were randomly assigned in equal
numbers to either a cognitive modification, systematic desensitization, or
waiting-list control group. Systematic desensitization treatment appeared to be
significantly more effective than either the cognitive modification or waiting-list
control on the performance measure, while the cognitive modification procedure
was more effective on one of the self-report measures of anxiety (The State-
Trait Anxiety Inventory-State form). Another study by Nauheim (1981)
evaluated the relative effectiveness of group anxiety management training,
group negative practice and group cognitive therapy in the reduction of test
anxiety in a sample of 80 high school students. Participants met for six 45
minute weekly sessions. Results showed that all three treatment groups
exhibited significantly lower self-reported test anxiety than the no treatment
control group. Significant differences among groups were not found for test
performance.
'¶$OHOLR DQG 0XUUD\ LQYHVWLJDWHG WKH HIIHFW RI WKH QXPEHU RI
cognitive therapy sessions on test anxiety in a sample of 55 college students.
Subjects were randomly assigned to groups meeting for eight weekly sessions,
groups meeting for four weekly sessions, or a waiting list control group. The
results suggested that the eight-session condition was superior to the four-
session condition, which was superior to the control condition in reducing self-
reported test anxiety. On the other hand, neither a task performance measure nor
grade point average showed any effect of treatment.
Smithy-Willis (1981) tested the effect of a cognitive modification
program on test anxiety and test performance in college students. The cognitive
modification program consisted of six treatment sessions, each of one-hour
duration. Each hour of treatment was divided into approximately 30 minutes of
progressive relaxation and 30 minutes of cognitive restructuring. The
37
pseudotherapy group received a meditation program that involved mind control
and body awareness. The subjects were randomly assigned to one of four
groups: (a) afternoon or (b) evening treatment; or (c) afternoon or (d) evening
pseudotherapy. Results showed that both the cognitive modification program
and the pseudotherapy technique significantly reduced anxiety and increased test
performance.
A study by Erdell (1983) explored the efficacy of relaxation training in a
cognitive approach to manage test anxiety. Female freshman and sophomores
formed three treatment conditions of equal size (n=17); cognitive restructuring,
a combination of cognitive restructuring and relaxation training, and waiting list
control group. Both treatments received cognitive restructuring during four
hour-long sessions over two weeks. The results showed that relaxation
combined with cognitive restructuring was associated with lesser degrees of
reported state and trait anxiety than that which resulted from exposure to
cognitive restructuring alone.
Wise and Haynes (1983) investigated the relative efficacy of rational
restructuring and attentional training for the cognitive treatment of test anxiety
in a sample of 38 college students. The results indicated that both cognitive
treatments were superior to a waiting-list control group in reducing test anxiety
and improving performance on analogue tasks.
5.2 Study Skills Training
Many students spend several hours a day studying, but they perform
poorly in their exams. These students may attribute their poor performance to
the lack of talent or to external factors such as bad luck. On the other hand, there
are students who spend just a few hours a day studying to achieve higher grades
than those who spend long hours. Certainly, high intellectual abilities are
important for high performance, but good study skills could be of equal
importance, especially in facilitating the tasks, which students should perform,
38
before and during exams. That is, when students master the skills needed for
reading, writing, time-management, note-taking, preparing for and taking
exams, they may not need to spend more time studying the required material or
performing the task at hand and will most likely perform better, compared to
WKHLUFRXQWHUSDUWVZKRGRQ¶WKDYHVXFKVNLOOV7KHPRUHVNLOOVVWXGHQts learn, the
better they perform. Some students have none or a few skills, while others have
sufficient skills.
Maybe it will be better when students learn the skills necessary for
effective study during their first years of study at school, so that they can make
good use of their time. When they learn these skills, and notice that they are
becoming more knowledgeable, and their grades are improving, they will
probably be highly motivated to study and view the learning process as
something enjoyable. If stXGHQWVGRQ¶WOHDUQWKHVHVNLOOVWKH\PD\SUDFWLFHSRRU
study skills and habits for many years. This may affect their grades, waste their
time and effort, and make them prone to academic or emotional problems, such
as test anxiety, procrastination, lack of motivation or lack of confidence.
:KHQ VWXGHQWV GRQ¶W have the opportunity to learn the necessary skills
when they are at the elementary stage of education, they can learn these skills as
they get older, while studying at school, university or anywhere else, but the
early they learn these skills, the more they benefit from their time and effort.
However, even if students perceive that they get poor grades in their exams and
they suffer from some problems as a result of the poor study skills, which they
have acquired over the years, it is not easy for them to find out which skills they
should learn, or how they can learn these skills, considering that there are
several skills that should be learned. To be efficient, these skills should be
presented in a meaningful order within a training program. This program should
be supervised by a qualified person (e.g. a counselor or teacher) in order to be
able to cope with the problems experienced by program participants in learning
these new skills. The participants, on their part, should work hard to benefit
39
from the program. It is necessary that each of them monitors his/her study
behavior, and be prepared to tell the other participants during the program
sessions, to which extent his/her study behavior has been improved, and whether
he/she has experienced any learning difficulties. This implies that each
participant should keep a diary, focusing on his/her study activities.
Clearly, the program can be applied individually or in groups, but students
will benefit from the experiences of each other, and receive more feedback,
when they participate in a group. Consequently, study skills training can be
defined as an approach for teaching students the effective study skills, and
helping them deal with the problems they face while learning.
The rationale behind study skills training is that test anxiety is a normal
reaction, which occurs when students lack the skills necessary for good
performance on exams. A number of studies have found that study skills training
is effective in reducing test anxiety and/or improving academic performance,
whereas other studies yielded contradictory findings. Allen (1971) assessed the
comparative effectiveness of systematic desensitization and study counseling
techniques in terms of reducing self-reported and physiological indicants of test
anxiety and increasing the academic performance of 75 test-anxious
undergraduates. The results indicated that a combination of desensitization and
study counseling was more effective in reducing physiologically measured
anxiety and improving academic and examination performance than either
technique alone.
Osterhouse (1972) compared the effectiveness of systematic
desensitization and study skills training for reducing test anxiety in subjects
selected on the basis of two types of self-reported anxiety. It was hypothesized
that subjects reporting high levels of emotional arousal during examinations
would benefit more from treatment by desensitization, while subjects reporting
high levels of cognitive worry about their test performance would benefit more
from training in study skills training. This hypothesis was not supported.
40
Desensitization subjects reported significantly less anxiety during a final
examination than did no-contact control subjects. Control subjects received
significantly higher examination scores than did study skills subjects.
A study by Cornish and Dilley (1973) compared systematic
desensitization, implosive therapy, and study counseling in reducing test anxiety
in a sample of 39 college students. In terms of debilitating anxiety, the
systematic desensitization group scored significantly lower than did the
implosive therapy, study skills, or control groups. The study skills group was not
significantly different from the control group. Grade point data showed no
significant difference between groups. Another study by Allen (1973)
investigated the treatment of test anxiety by group-administered and self-
administered relaxation and study counseling in a sample of 84 college students.
Subjects received therapy consisting of relaxation or relaxation and study
counseling in small groups or via self-instructional manuals. They were also
assigned to a group-administered placebo condition or two control groups. The
results indicated that both therapeutic methods were equally effective in
reducing anxiety and improving grades, and significantly better than no
treatment.
Horne and Matson (1977) compared the effectiveness of modeling,
desensitization, flooding and study skills for reducing test anxiety in a sample of
100 college students. The results indicated that modeling was most effective in
decreasing test anxiety followed by desensitization and then flooding. A study
skills program was significantly more effective than flooding or a waiting-list
control in increasing final grades. Most subjects expressed satisfaction with
modeling and approximately half of the subjects said they would recommend
desensitization. Although flooding eliminated test anxiety, a majority said that
they would not recommend it, because of the psychological discomfort it
produced.
41
A study by Lent and Russell (1978) compared the relative effectiveness of
two multicomponent strategies in the treatment of test anxiety in a sample of 57
college students. The subjects were assigned to one of four conditions: (1) no-
treatment, (2) participation in a study-skills course alone, (3) systematic
desensitization in combination with a study-skills course, or (4) a combined cue-
controlled-desensitization-study-skills program. It was found that both
desensitization treatment programs demonstrated significant improvement over
no-treatment on self-report debilitative and facilitative test anxiety, state and
trait anxiety, and study habits. The superiority of the multicomponent groups
relative to study-skills training alone was restricted to debilitative test anxiety
and state anxiety. Both multicomponent groups earned significantly higher
posttreatment grade point averages than the control subjects.
Altmaier and Woodward (1981) assessed the effectiveness of vicarious
desensitization and study skills training in reducing test anxiety in a sample of
43 college students. Self-report measures indicated that vicarious desensitization
resulted in lower test and trait anxiety than study skills training alone or no
treatment. In addition, subjects who received study skills alone did not
significantly differ from the control subjects on test or trait anxiety. Academic
performance measures indicated no differential effectiveness.
Another study by Bander, Russell and Zamostny (1982) examined the
relative effectiveness of cue-controlled relaxation, study skills counseling and a
combined study skills and cue-controlled relaxation for the treatment of
mathematics anxiety in a sample of 36 college students. The results
demonstrated that the study skills condition produced significant improvements
on self-reported mathematics anxiety and mathematics performance, and the
cue-controlled relaxation and combined conditions led to significant declines in
generalized test anxiety. However, by follow-up, cue-controlled relaxation was
found to be superior to the other treatments on level of mathematics anxiety and
mathematics performance.
42
Sapp (1989) investigated the effects of autosuggestion therapy combined
with study skills counseling, relaxation therapy combined with study skills
counseling, and nondirective therapy on test anxiety in undergraduates. The
results indicated that nondirective therapy was the most effective treatment.
However, the three treatment groups were more effective in reducing test
anxiety and improving academic performance than a control group. A study by
Naveh-Benjamin (1991) compared training programs intended for different
types of test-anxious students. The first type consisted of students with good
study habits who had difficulties mostly in retrieval for a test. The second type
consisted of students with poor study habits that had problems in all stages of
processing. Each of the 84 high test-anxious university students was subjected to
either desensitization or study skills training. Results showed desensitization
was more beneficial for those high test-anxious students with problems in
retrieval, probably by reducing interfering thoughts assumed to block retrieval.
Study skills training benefited more those high test-anxious students with
problems in all stages of information processing, probably by allowing them to
better learn the information.
Some studies compared the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy
and study skills training in the reduction of test anxiety. In a study by
McCordick, Kaplan, Finn and Smith (1979), 48 undergraduate students were
randomly assigned to one of three experimental or two control conditions: (1) a
FRUH WUHDWPHQW ZKLFK FRQVLVWHG RI 0HLFKHQEDXP¶V FRJQLWLYH behavior
modification and study skills training, (2) the core treatment plus videotaped
modeling, (3) the core treatment plus rehearsal modeling, (4) study skills
control, and (5) waiting list control. It was found that treated groups showed
greater improvement in test anxiety compared with the controls, with the
rehearsal modeling condition ranking first among the treatments. No treatment
led to significant improvement in academic performance.
43
Also, in a study conducted by Decker and Russell (1981), 30 test-anxious
students with deficient study habits were assigned to one of three experimental
conditions: (1) a combined cue-controlled relaxation and cognitive restructuring
program, (2) a study-skills program, or (3) a waiting-list control group. The
results showed that both the cue-controlled relaxation and cognitive-
restructuring group and the study-skills group demonstrated significant
improvement over the waiting-list control group on self-report debilitative test
anxiety and irrational thinking. The study skills program led to the most
dramatic improvements in grade point averages.
A study by Minor (1982) compared the effectiveness of cognitive therapy
and study skills training in the group treatment of test anxiety. 40 test-anxious
students were randomly assigned to one of four groups: (a) cognitive therapy,
(b) study skills training, (c) a combination of cognitive therapy and study skills
training, and (d) a pseudotherapy control procedure. 11 subjects were also
assigned to a waiting-list control group. Treatment consisted of five one-hour
weekly sessions. The results indicated that no consistent pattern favoring one
treatment group over another emerged on self-report measures of test anxiety.
No treatment led to significant improvement in academic performance.
Dendato and Diener (1986) assessed the effectiveness of
cognitive/relaxation therapy and study-skills training in reducing self-reported
anxiety and improving the academic performance of 45 test-anxious students.
The subjects were randomly assigned to one of four treatment conditions: (1)
relaxation/cognitive therapy, (2) study-skills training, (3) a combination of
relaxation/cognitive therapy and study-skills training, or (4) no treatment. The
relaxation/cognitive therapy was found to be effective in reducing anxiety, but
failed to improve classroom test scores. The combined therapy both reduced
anxiety and improved performance relative to the no-treatment control condition
and was significantly more effective than was either treatment alone.
44
A study by Bosse (1987) assessed the comparative effectiveness of
relaxation and cognitive counseling, study skills counseling, and a combined
program in reducing test anxiety in a sample of 38 students ranging from 9th to
12th grade. The groups met for one and one-half hours for six weeks with a
pretest, posttest and ten week follow-XS7KH UHVXOWV GLGQ¶W SURYLGH VXSSRUW IRU
any one treatment in reducing test anxiety, improving study skills and habits or
improving grade point average.
Another study by Lukens (1988) compared three approaches to the
treatment of test anxiety. 55 test anxious college students were randomly
assigned to one of three groups: Commitment counseling, cognitive therapy, or
study counseling. Commitment counseling was defined as a group therapy in
which individuals examine their goals in the academic field and their
commitment to being students. Participants receiving cognitive therapy reported
higher facilitating anxiety than study counseling subjects. Study counseling
subjects achieved significantly higher grade point averages than the commitment
and cognitive groups. Jones (1988) compared the effectiveness of cognitive
modification and study skills training in the treatment of test anxiety in a sample
of 52 community college students with deficient study skills. The results did not
indicate that study skills training or cognitive modification was a preferred
method of treatment with this sample. Both treatments were equally effective in
reducing self-reported test anxiety. Pretest and posttest tests were not found to
be significant for grade point average.
A study by Dogarlu (1991) investigated the comparative effectiveness of
either cognitive therapy or systematic desensitization, in combination with study
skill training upon self-reported test anxiety and academic performance in a
sample of 82 medical college students. All subjects receiving treatment met for a
total of seven 90-minute treatment sessions spanning over seven weeks. Results
showed that both treatment groups made significant improvements from
pretesting to posttesting in anxiety reduction and in study skills. Only the group
45
that received cognitive therapy plus skill training showed a significant
improvement from pre- to posttreatment in academic performance.
The results of the above studies, which compared the effectiveness of
cognitive behavioral therapy and study skills training in reducing test anxiety
DQG LPSURYLQJ DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPDQFH GLGQ¶W VKRZ D FOHDU VXSHULRULW\ RI RQH
treatment method over the other. This demonstrates the importance of
conducting more studies to confirm whether both methods are equally effective
or one method is more effective than the other. In addition, the literature of test
anxiety shows that the number of studies examining the effect of treatment of
test anxiety on procrastination and satisfaction with study is very few.
6. Significance of the Investigation
Test anxious students often need counseling to help them reduce their
anxiety and improve their grades. Therefore, many studies tried to shed light on
different areas of test anxiety and to examine the efficacy of various types of
therapy in the treatment of test anxiety. As a contribution in this direction, the
descriptive correlational study of this investigation examines the relationships
between test anxiety, procrastination, satisfaction with study and academic
performance. Knowing the strength of the relationships between the variables is
important for better understanding of these variables, and for developing
treatment programs related to them.
On the other hand, the experimental study investigates the effectiveness of
a cognitive behavioral therapy program, and a study skills training program in
reducing test anxiety and procrastination, and improving academic performance
and satisfaction with study. It examines the effects of two treatment programs
not only on test anxiety, but also on other related variables. These programs
consist of organized sessions, each session includes activities to be performed.
Thus, they can easily be used by other researchers and therapists.
46
The results of the two studies are expected to be of great value to
counselors, particularly in helping anxious and procrastinating students, and to
researchers who are interested in conducting studies in the fields of test anxiety
and procrastination.
II. Correlational Study
1. Questions
The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationships between test
anxiety, procrastination, academic performance and satisfaction with study in
Jordanian high school male students. Thus, the following research questions are
formulated:
(1) What is the correlation between test anxiety and procrastination?
(2) What is the correlation between test anxiety and academic performance?
(3) What is the correlation between test anxiety and satisfaction with study?
(4) What is the correlation between procrastination and academic performance?
(5) What is the correlation between procrastination and satisfaction with study?
2. Method
2.1 Subjects
Subjects were 573 high school male students. They were selected from
four typical high schools in the northern region of Jordan during October 2002.
The mean age of subjects was 17.01 years (SD= 0.81). They were in grades 10-
12. The 12th grade is the last year of the secondary school in which the final
examination is held by the ministry of education. Table 1 shows the distribution
of subjects by grade.
47
Table 1: Distribution of participants by grade.
Grade Frequency Percent
Tenth 184 32,1
Eleventh 212 37,0
Twelfth 177 30,9
Total 573 100,0
2.2 Variables
This study aims to investigate the relationships between the following
variables:
1. Test Anxiety:
a. Anxiety-producing conditions:
-Repertory uncertainty
-Lack of knowledge
-Recitation situations
b. Manifestations of test anxiety:
-Physiological manifestation
-Emotional manifestation
-Cognitive manifestation
c. Coping strategies:
-Danger control
-Situation control
-Anxiety control
-Anxiety repression
d. Stability:
-Internal stability
-External stability
2. General test anxiety (manifestations + internal stability)
3. Academic procrastination
4. Academic performance
48
5. Satisfaction with study
2.3 Instruments
Test anxiety was measured by the short form of the Differential Test
Anxiety Inventory (DAI), developed by Rost and Schermer (1997).
Procrastination was measured by a short form of the Aitken Procrastination
Inventory (API) (Aitken, 1982). Academic performance was assessed by the
mean grade point average (G.P.A) of the student for the two semesters
immediately preceding the semester during which the inventories were
administered. Satisfaction with study was measured by a single-item question.
The item was rated along a five point scale ranging from (1) not at all satisfied
to (5) very satisfied.
2.3.1 Differential Test Anxiety Inventory (DAI)
There are two forms of the DAI. A long form (146 items), which is
usually used for the purposes of individual diagnosis, and a short form (96
items), which is suitable for research purposes. The researcher translated the
short form of the DAI from German into Arabic and used it as a measure of test
anxiety in the present study. In the short form, each 8 items form a subscale.
Thus, the number of subscales is 12, which cover 4 areas, for each of which
there are special instructions.
Regarding the area of manifestations of test anxiety, each item in this area
is rated along a five-point scale measuring the intensity of anxiety:
1= strongly not true
2= not true
3= neutral
4= true
5= strongly true
49
For the areas of (a) anxiety-producing conditions, (b) coping strategies,
and (c) stability, each item in these areas is rated along a five-point scale
measuring the frequency:
1= almost never (i.e., less than 10% of the cases).
2= sometimes (i.e., nearly 25% of the cases).
3= to the half (i.e., nearly 50% of the cases).
4= often (i.e., nearly 75% of the cases).
5= almost always (i.e., more than 90% of the cases).
2.3.1.1 Description of the DAI Subscales
1. Anxiety-producing conditions
a. Repertory Uncertainty
Some situations are either prone to test anxiety or induce test anxiety,
such as those situations in which the person is uncertain about potential
demands, and whether he/she has at his/her disposal the necessary skills to deal
with them successfully. Since this test anxiety producing condition is primarily
located within the person, indicating a generalized deficit in perceived
repertoire, it is named repertory uncertainty (Rost & Schermer, 1989).
b. Lack of Knowledge
It has been found that lack of knowledge is an anxiety evoking condition.
This kind of test anxiety provocation is triggered by the realization that
DFKLHYHPHQW GHPDQGV FDQ¶W EH PHWDERYH DOO WKRVH ZKLFK DUH UHSUHVHQWHG E\
test (Rost & Schermer, 1989).
c. Recitation Situations
The situations in which the student is required to speak or to do some
activities in front of the teacher and classmates may induce test anxiety reactions
50
relatively independent of knowledge and examination content. Thus, test anxiety
is the consequence when the achievement has to be presented to others and
when reactions that pose a threat to self-esteem are anticipated (Rost &
Schermer, 1989).
2. Manifestations of Test Anxiety
This area of the DAI focuses on the reactions to test anxiety-evoking cues.
a. Cognitive Manifestation
This manifestation includes the disturbances of concentration and
cognitive interferences (thoughts and memory blockage).
b. Physiological Manifestation
This subscale measures the physiological signs of test anxiety (e.g.,
sweating, trembling, rapid heart beat).
c. Emotional Manifestation
This subscale focuses on the emotional reactions of test anxiety (e.g.,
feeling of helplessness, repression, loneliness).
3. Test Anxiety Coping Strategies
This area concentrates on 4 strategies for coping with test anxiety:
a. Danger Control
Danger control is based on the idea that when students use their time
effectively and prepare well for the forthcoming test or achievement situation, it
would be more probable that they get better grades and become less anxious.
Thus, the danger control subscale covers different learning and study strategies
51
that increase the subjectively estimated standard of knowledge and decrease the
acute danger and the resulting test anxiety (Rost & Schermer, 1989).
b. Anxiety Repression
This subscale focuses on the denial of the test anxiety-producing situation.
This denial serves a palliative function, which can lead to an effective relief
without modifying the underlying anxiety potential directly. In most cases, this
relief will only last a short time. This strategy can change the cognitive
representation of a problem situation in a non-instrumental manner (Rost &
Schermer, 1989).
c. Anxiety Control
Anxiety control subscale focuses on the relaxation and anticipation as
methods for coping with test anxiety. Relaxation is intended only after
interpreting the physiological arousal as test anxiety. By anticipation is meant
the person tries to explore the danger cognitively (Rost & Schermer, 1989).
d. Situation Control
Situation control focuses on the strategies that students use when the
intended test anxiety control or test anxiety repression proves to be insufficient,
such as cheating, avoiding or procrastinating the test situation (Rost &
Schermer, 1989).
4. Stability
The stability area of the DAI consists of two subscales:
a. Internal Stability
52
This subscale represents the worries, which revolve in an almost
compulsive manner around future and past examination situations. They reflect
a generalized inclination to anxious rumination (Rost & Schermer, 1989).
b. External Stability
Anxious individuals often show specific reactions to gain sympathy from
others. This subscale focuses on the social support, understanding,
consideration, affiliation and sympathy, which those individuals receive from
significant others (e.g., parents, teachers, peers) (Rost & Schermer, 1989).
2.3.2 Aitken Procrastination Inventory (API)
A short form of the API was used as a measure of academic
procrastination in this study. 10 items of the short form were the same items
chosen by Weigand (2001) from the German version of the API (see Helmke &
6FKUDGHURQHPRUHLWHPZKLFKLV³ZKHQ,KDYHDWHVWVFKHGXOHGVRRQ,
RIWHQ ILQG P\VHOIZRUNLQJ RQ RWKHU MREV ZKHQ D GHDGOLQHLV QHDU´ ZDV FKRVHQ
from the English version (see Ferrari et al., 1995). Accordingly, the present form
of the API consisted of 11 items. 5 positively phrased items were reverse coded
before analyses were conducted. These items are: pr1, pr3, pr6, pr7, pr9. The
answer pattern is rated along a five-SRLQW VFDOH IURP ³ DOPRVW QHYHU WUXH´ to
³DOPRVW DOZD\V WUXH´ 7KH KLJKHU WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV¶ VFRUHV WKH KLJKHU WKH
SDUWLFLSDQWV¶DFDGHPLFSURFUDVWLQDWLRQOHYHOV
2.3.3 Reliability
The reliability for the DAI subscales and the API was measured using
&URQEDFK¶VDOSKDThe alpha reliability coefficients are presented in Table 2.
Table 2: Alpha reliability coefficients for the DAI subscales and for the API.
Variable Alpha
Repertory Uncertainty (ru) .86
Lack of Knowledge (lk) .82
53
Recitation Situations (rs) .83
Physiological Manifestation (Phy) .73
Emotional Manifestation (emo) .77
Cognitive Manifestation (cog) .83
Danger Control (dc) .73
Situation Control (sc) .78
Anxiety Control (ac) .70
Anxiety Repression (ar) .71
External Stability (es) .80
Internal Stability (is) .81
General Test Anxiety (gta) .91
Procrastination (pr) .77
Although for the purposes of group comparison, Alpha >.50 is sufficient
(Lienert & Raatz, 1995), using factor scores leads to more reliable scores. Thus,
correlations were conducted on factor scores for the DAI subscales and for the
API, because of the moderate reliability of some subscales of the DAI (phy, dc,
ac, ar).
2.3.4 Validity
Construct validity for the subscales of the DAI and for the API was
assessed through factor analysis. The three subscales of the area of anxiety-
producing conditions were replicated. The first 15 eigenvalues are: 6.06, 2.08,
1,57, 1.06, 1.00, 0.94, 0.88, 0.82, 0.80, 0.78, 0.73, 0.71, 0.70, 0.64, 0.63. The
varimax rotated principal component analysis is shown in Table 3.
Table 3: Varimax rotated principal component analysis of the area of anxiety- producing
conditions. RU = repertory uncertainty; Lk = lack of knowledge; RS = recitation situations.
(% Var = percent variance explained).
Item C1 C2 C3 h
2
RU1 .17 .0 9 .50 .29
RU2 .04 .24 .68 .52
RU3 .20 .14 .53 .34
RU4 .08 .06 .70 .50
RU5 .13 .07 .51 .28
RU6 .32 .15 .54 .42
RU7 .16 .27 .50 .35
RU8 .16 .11 .67 .49
LK1 .60 .13 -.10 .28
LK2 .64 .13 .17 .46
LK3 .63 .01 .26 .47
LK4 .70 .04 .12 .51
54
LK5 .42 .03 .17 .21
LK6 .52 .21 .15 .34
LK7 .57 .13 .20 .38
LK8 .55 .04 .24 .36
RS1 .06 .68 .12 .48
RS2 .37 .40 .25 .36
RS3 .01 .68 .07 .47
RS4 .08 .59 .20 .40
RS5 .24 .58 .18 .43
RS6 .05 .55 .05 .31
RS7 .03 .72 .09 .53
RS8 .22 .53 .18 .36
% Var 13.7 13.4 13.4
The three subscales of the area of manifestations of test anxiety were also
replicated. The first 15 eigenvalues are: 6.11, 1.89, 1.27, 1.13, 1.11, 1.04, 1.00,
0.98, 0.84, 0.78, 0.74, 0.72, 0.70, 0.67, 0.64. The varimax rotated principal
component analysis is presented in Table 4.
Table 4: Varimax rotated principal component analysis of the manifestations of test anxiety.
COG = cognitive manifestation; EMO = emotional manifestation; PHY = physiological
manifestation. (% Var = percent variance explained).
Item C1 C2 C3 h
2
COG1 .47 .19 .08 .26
COG2 .49 .28 .15 .34
COG3 .65 .18 .25 .52
COG4 .59 .19 .01 .38
COG5 .61 .19 .14 .43
COG6 .62 -.04 .11 .40
COG7 .71 .18 .15 .56
COG8 .66 .08 .05 .45
EMO1 .24 .50 .05 .31
EMO2 .24 .62 .09 .45
EMO3 .22 .46 .19 .30
EMO4 .08 .68 .16 .49
EMO5 .17 .61 .13 .42
EMO6 .18 .63 .07 .43
EMO7 .09 .54 .24 .36
EMO8 .19 .46 .39 .40
PHY1 .33 .19 .54 .44
PHY2 .15 .16 .50 .30
PHY3 .01 .14 .57 .35
PHY4 .04 -.06 .40 .17
55
PHY5 .09 .22 .59 .41
PHY6 .09 .05 .64 .42
PHY7 .15 .13 .43 .22
PHY8 .13 .14 .66 .47
%Var 14.9 11.8 11.8
In the area of coping strategies, item AC4 (I try to be quiet, so that I can
develop a strategy) loaded more highly on the DC subscale (danger control), and
item AR1 (I convince myself that not everything is so bad) loaded more highly
on the AC subscale (anxiety control). The first 15 eigenvalues are: 4.84, 3.59,
1.51, 1.37, 1.28, 1.17, 1.08, 1.02, 1.01, 0.93, 0.91, 0.84, 0.83, 0.82, 0.78. The
varimax rotated principal component analysis is presented in Table 5.
Table 5: Varimax rotated principal component analysis of the coping strategies. AC = anxiety
control; AR = anxiety repression; DC = danger control; SC = situation control. (% Var =
percent variance explained).
Item C1 C2 C3 C4 h
2
AC1 .30 .04 .01 .51 .35
AC2 .25 .12 .04 .60 .44
AC3 -.10 -.06 .31 .53 .39
AC4 .55 -.01 .10 .29 .40
AC5 .09 .02 .29 .41 .26
AC6 .20 .12 .13 .56 .39
AC7 .45 -.04 .13 .39 .37
AC8 .06 .17 .08 .28 .12
AR1 .08 -.03 .12 .58 .36
AR2 .06 -.02 .50 .25 .32
AR3 .06 .12 .56 .16 .36
AR4 .18 .18 .48 .09 .30
AR5 .34 -.06 .50 .15 .39
AR6 -.08 .30 .44 .06 .29
AR7 -.01 .15 .65 .12 .46
AR8 -.25 .13 .23 .46 .34
DC1 .54 -.07 .05 .20 .34
DC2 .62 -.07 -.07 .11 .41
DC3 .41 .14 -.14 .24 .27
DC4 .50 .05 -.16 .13 .30
DC5 .38 .36 .04 -.08 .28
DC6 .66 -.20 .08 .05 .49
DC7 .60 -.07 .03 -.03 .37
DC8 .58 -.04 .02 .06 .34
56
SC1 .07 .62 .07 -.06 .40
SC2 -.21 .47 .31 -.06 .37
SC3 .24 .48 .02 -.05 .29
SC4 -.21 .53 .17 .19 .39
SC5 -.07 .38 .19 .09 .19
SC6 -.14 .64 .12 .28 .43
SC7 -.05 .67 .05 .18 .49
SC8 -.16 .49 .36 .01 .40
%Var 12.3 7.9 7.8 7.4
Both stability subscales were also replicated. The eigenvalues are: 3.30,
2.64, 1.14, 1.01, 0.98, 0.81, 0.80, 0.72, 0.69, 0.68, 0.62, 0.58, 0.57, 0.51, 0.50,
0.46. The varimax rotated principal component analysis is given in Table 6.
Table 6: Varimax rotated principal component analysis of the stability subscales. IS = internal
stability; ES = external stability. (% Var = percent variance explained).
Item C1 C2 h
2
IS1 .66 .03 .44
IS2 .61 -.09 .38
IS3 .55 .05 .31
IS4 .68 .09 .47
IS5 .62 .08 .39
IS6 .54 .11 .30
IS7 .66 -.03 .44
IS8 .68 .01 .46
ES1 .06 .54 .30
ES2 -.03 .62 .39
ES3 .03 .60 .36
ES4 -.04 .50 .25
ES5 .17 .43 .21
ES6 -.06 .73 .54
ES7 -.06 .67 .45
ES8 .24 .47 .28
%Var 20.3 16.9
Although the API was designed as a uni-dimensional scale, the results
show that it seems to be two-dimensional (see Table 7). However, in the present
analysis, only the one-component solution is considered, because this solution
represents the optimal summary of the variables. In addition, the uni-
dimensionality of the scale has been documented in several studies. The rotated
57
eigenvalues are: 2.40, 1.72, 1.05, 0.94, 0.86, 0.84, 0.79, 0.73, 0.59, 0.57, 0.52.
Table 7 shows the principal component matrix of the procrastination items.
Table 7: procrastination items in a principal
component matrix. (% Var = percent variance explained).
Item C1 h
2
PR1 .30 .09
PR2 .66 .44
PR3 .66 .44
PR4 .35 .12
PR5 .09 .01
PR6 .50 .25
PR7 .52 .27
PR8 -.05 .00
PR9 .66 .44
PR10 .48 .23
PR11 .33 .11
%Var 21.8
2.4 Procedures
The researcher applied to the ministry of education of Jordan for
permission to conduct his study on a sample of school students. After the
approval of the application, the inventories were administered to a sample
selected from four schools. Six classes of the 10th grade were selected from
among ten classes in two high schools; six classes of the 11th grade and six
classes of the 12th grade were selected from two schools containing only
students in these two grades. The inventories were distributed to students in
classrooms. At the beginning, the researcher explained the instructions relating
to the scale of manifestations of test anxiety, emphasizing that the items in this
part focus on the intensity of anxiety. When the subjects had completed this part,
he turned to the instructions relating to the other parts of the inventories,
stressing that the items in these parts focus on the frequency. The students
needed about 30 minutes to complete the inventories.
58
2.5 Data Analysis
The following statistical measures were used in this study:
1. Factor analyses were conducted for the four areas of the DAI to help
understand the dimensions of each area. Also, the API items were factor
analyzed. Factor scores were computed for each student.
2. Pearson product moment correlation coefficients were calculated to describe
the strength of the relationships between the dimensions of test anxiety,
general test anxiety, procrastination, grade point average and satisfaction
with study.
3. Results
This study aimed to examine the relationships between test anxiety,
procrastination, academic performance and satisfaction with study in Jordanian
high school male students. Pearson product moment correlation coefficients
were calculated to assess the relationships between these variables. Table 8
displays the correlations between the variables.
3.1 Test Anxiety and Procrastination
The results showed that there was a higher correlation between the
cognitive manifestation and procrastination (r= .25) than between the emotional
manifestation and procrastination (r= .15). No correlation was demonstrated
between the physiological manifestation and procrastination (r= .01). Regarding
the anxiety-producing conditions, the results showed that there was a stronger
correlation between repertory uncertainty and procrastination (r= .37) than
between recitation situations and procrastination (r= .15). No correlation was
found between lack of knowledge and procrastination (r= -.01).
Concerning the coping strategies with test anxiety, danger control was
found to be negatively correlated with procrastination (r= -.40), while situation
control was found to be positively correlated with procrastination (r= .32). A
59
low positive correlation was demonstrated between anxiety repression and
procrastination (r= .15). No correlation was found between anxiety control and
procrastination (r= .03).
Regarding the stability of test anxiety, internal stability was found to be
positively related to procrastination (r= .29), whereas external stability was
negatively correlated with it (r= -.24). General test anxiety was found to be
positively correlated with procrastination (r= .29) (see Table 8).
3.2 Test Anxiety and Academic Performance
An inverse correlation was found between the cognitive manifestation and
G.P.A (r= -.22), and between the emotional manifestation and G.P.A (r= -.14),
but no correlation was found between the physiological manifestation and G.P.A
(r= -.08). Concerning the anxiety-producing conditions, an inverse correlation
was demonstrated between repertory uncertainty and G.P.A (r= -.22), and
between recitation situations and G.P.A (r= -.19), while no correlation was
found between lack of knowledge and G.P.A (r= .05).
60
Table 8: Correlations between test anxiety, procrastination, satisfaction with study and grade
point average. (N = 573)
COG EMO PHY LK RS RU DC SC AR AC IS ES GTA PR SS G.P.A
COG - .00 .00 .20 .14 .36 -.07 .26 .10 .08 .33 .06 .56 .25 -.16 -.22
EMO
PHY
LK
RS
RU
DC
SC
AR
AC
IS
ES
GTA
PR
SS
G.P.A
- .00 .22 .18 .25 .04 .22 .13 .18 .31 .02 .55 .15 -.16 -.14
-.20 .21 .01 .17 .17 .07 .11 .23 .09 .51 .01 -.06 -.08
- .00 .00 .17 .14 .07 .22 .36 .06 .41 -.01 -.10 .05
- .00 -.01 .28 -.02 .04 .24 .10 .32 .15 -.12 -.19
--.14 .22 .23 .18 .31 -.06 .39 .37 -.28 -.22
- .00 .00 .00 -.03 .38 .04 -.40 .17 .09
- .00 .00 .38 .02 .43 .32 -.17 -.26
- .00 .21 .02 .21 .15 -.16 -.06
-.22 .15 .24 .03 .02 .02
- .00 .78 .29 -.27 -.10
- .07 -.24 .16 -.03
-.29 -.27 -.22
--.33 -.24
-.19
-
Note. COG = cognitive manifestation; EMO = emotional manifestation; PHY = physiological
manifestation; LK = lack of knowledge; RS = recitation situations; RU = repertory
uncertainty; DC = danger control; SC = situation control; AR = anxiety repression; AC =
anxiety control; IS = internal stability; ES = external stability; GTA = general test anxiety;
PR = procrastination; SS = satisfaction with study; G.P.A = grade point average of the
student for the two semesters immediately preceding the semester during which the
inventories were administered. Statistically significant correlations (p < 0.05) are in boldface.
Regarding the coping strategies, a low positive correlation was found
between danger control and G.P.A (r= .09), while an inverse correlation was
found between situation control and G.P.A (r= -.26). No correlation was found
between anxiety repression and G.P.A (r= -.06), and between anxiety control
61
and G.P.A (r= .02). With respect to the stability of test anxiety, the findings
indicated that there was a low negative correlation between internal stability
and G.P.A (r= -.10). No correlation appeared between external stability and
G.P.A (r= -.03). General test anxiety was found to be negatively associated with
G.P.A (r= -.22) (see Table 8).
3.3 Test Anxiety and Satisfaction with Study (SS)
An inverse correlation appeared between the cognitive manifestation and
SS (r= -.16) and between the emotional manifestation and SS (r= -.16).
However, no correlation was demonstrated between the physiological
manifestation and SS (r= -.06). Regarding the anxiety-producing conditions, the
results showed that there was a higher correlation between repertory uncertainty
and SS (r= -.28) than between reaction situations and SS (r= -.12) and between
lack of knowledge and SS (r= -.10).
Concerning the coping strategies, a positive correlation was found
between danger control and SS (r= .17), while an inverse correlation was
demonstrated between situation control and SS (r= -.17), and between anxiety
repression and SS (r= -.16). No correlation was found between anxiety control
and SS (r= .02). Regarding the stability of test anxiety, a higher correlation was
found between internal stability and SS (r= -.27) than between external stability
and SS (r= .16). General test anxiety was found to be negatively associated with
SS (r= -.27) (see Table 8).
3.4 Procrastination and Academic Performance
The results showed that there was an inverse correlation between
procrastination and G.P.A (r= -.24).
3.5 Procrastination and Satisfaction with Study
62
This study also demonstrated that there was an inverse correlation
between procrastination and satisfaction with study (r= -.33).
4. Discussion
The data showed positive correlations between a number of the test
anxiety subscales and procrastination. The cognitive manifestation of test
anxiety was positively correlated with procrastination. Repertory uncertainty,
which focuses on the lack of concentration or distraction of attention as an
anxiety-producing condition, was also positively correlated with procrastination.
This indicates that students, who report that they cannot concentrate well while
preparing for exams or during exams, procrastinate more than those who report
that they can focus their attention on their tasks. Similarly, procrastinators
compared to nonprocrastinators may find it more difficult to concentrate or to
remember things when they perform their academic tasks.
Situation control was positively correlated with procrastination,
suggesting that students, who frequently delay the completion of their academic
tasks are usually unprepared for exams. Accordingly, they try to control the
exam situation by means of cheating, reporting sick, and the like. They want to
pass exams without making any serious efforts to improve their study habits.
Such students are usually less motivated to study and spend most of their time
doing their favorite hobbies.
On the other hand, there was a positive correlation between internal
stability and procrastination, indicating that students who are worried about their
exams tend to postpone completing their assignments, perhaps because of fear of
failure. Another explanation is that procrastinating students may have negative
expectations regarding their exams, since they are not sufficiently prepared for
them. By contrast, students who perform their tasks day by day, are better
prepared, more confident and less worried. They think positively about their
assignments, including exams and homework.
63
A negative correlation was shown between external stability and
procrastination. This suggests that students, who delay performing their tasks
until later, receive less social support from significant others such as parents,
friends, peers, etc., compared to their counterparts, who do their assignments
regularly. This may be because procrastinating students give an impression that
they are not serious students. Another explanation of this correlation is that
students, who receive less social support from significant others may tend to
procrastinate more; they feel that they are neglected.
A negative correlation was found between danger control and
procrastination, suggesting that students, who make study schedules and stick to
them, and pay more attention during classes, procrastinate less than those who
do not keep to their schedules. These findings are consistent with those of
Weigand (2001), who reported that there were significant correlations between
the test anxiety subscales and procrastination.
The present results showed that there was a positive correlation between
general test anxiety and procrastination. This is relatively consistent with a study
by Solomon and Rothblum (1984), which found that fear of failure, as a reason
for procrastination correlated significantly with trait anxiety. The finding is also
consistent with a study by Rothblum et al. (1986), who reported that high
procrastinators experienced high and stable levels of general anxiety, and also
had more test anxiety. Thus, the relationship between test anxiety and
procrastination is clearly positive, which means that high-test anxiety goes
together with high procrastination and vice versa.
It is interesting to note that there was no correlation between the
physiological manifestation of anxiety and G.P.A, indicating that there is no
difference between low-and high-performing students with regard to the
physiological reactions in evaluative situations. However, the same cannot be
said when it comes to the other manifestations of anxiety. The results showed
that there were significant negative correlations between the cognitive
64
manifestation and G.P.A and between the emotional manifestation and G.P.A,
suggesting that when low-performing students are in stressful situations, they
suffer more from lack of concentration and feel more repressed, compared to
their high-performing counterparts. A negative relationship was found between
general test anxiety and academic performance. This relationship is consistent
with previous studies (see Hembree, 1988; Seipp, 1991).
These results showed that feeling of lack of knowledge was not correlated
with grade point average, while repertory uncertainty was negatively correlated
with it. That is, even if students feel that they are not prepared for exams or lack
the knowledge required to perform well, it may not have negative effects on
their grades, but if they do not concentrate well when they prepare for exams,
they may get poor grades. This finding emphasizes the importance of developing
treatment programs for helping anxious students concentrate better when they
perform their tasks.
A negative correlation was demonstrated between situation control and
grade point average, indicating that students who depend on means other than
studying to obtain grades and overcome anxiety, they usually get poor grades.
Such students are less academically prepared and may not always get a chance
to obtain grades by devious means. Therefore, they perform poorly and are less
satisfied with their academic achievements.
Since repertory uncertainty was negatively correlated with grade point
average, it is not surprising that it was also negatively correlated with
satisfaction with study. Clearly, satisfaction with study is always a result of
other factors. Lack of concentration can result in poor performance, which in
turn leads to low satisfaction with study.
Additionally, the results showed that there was a negative correlation
between internal stability and satisfaction with study, indicating that worries
about study, including exams and assignments, are related to low satisfaction
with study. Students who are often engaged in negative self-talk regarding their
65
schools, teachers, etc., tend to be less satisfied with their studies. They have a
negative view of their academic achievements and goals. Counselors should
help these students have a positive attitude towards learning.
General test anxiety was found to be positively correlated with
procrastination and poor academic achievement, thus the negative correlation
between general test anxiety and satisfaction with study may be a natural result
of the correlations between test anxiety and the other variables. This finding is
consistent with the study by Weigand (2001), which demonstrated a negative
correlation between test anxiety and satisfaction with study.
A negative correlation was found between procrastination and grade point
average, indicating that procrastination accompanies poor academic
performance. In this regard, the results of the present study do not support those
of Solomon and Rothblum (1984), who found that course grade was not
significantly correlated with self-reported procrastination. They attributed the
lack of correlation between self-reported procrastination and course grade to the
PHDVXUHRIDFDGHPLFSHUIRUPDQFHZKLFKZDVEDVHGRQO\RQVWXGHQWV¶JUDGHVLQ
a course. However, the results of the present study support those of Rothblum et
al. (1986), who reported a significant negative correlation between
procrastination and grade point average.
Furthermore, the present study showed a negative correlation between
procrastination and satisfaction with study. Students who delay completing their
assignments are less satisfied with their studies than those who complete their
assignments in time. This result is consistent with that of Weigend (2001), who
found a negative correlation between these two variables in a sample of
university students.
In summary, the present study showed that there were significant
correlations between test anxiety, procrastination, satisfaction with study and
academic performance. These findings are consistent with those of studies
conducted in similar settings.
66
III. Experimental Study
The goal of this study is to examine the effects of cognitive behavioral
therapy and study skills training in reducing test anxiety and procrastination, and
increasing academic performance and satisfaction with study in Jordanian high
school male students. The design of this study consists of two experimental
groups and one control group. The experimental design is illustrated below:
R: EG1: O1 X O2
R: EG2: O1 X O2
R: CG: O1 O2
Note. R = randomization; EG = experimental group; CG = control group; O = measurement; X =
treatment.
1. Hypotheses
The following hypotheses are tested:
(1) H0: There are no significant differences in test anxiety between the cognitive
behavioral therapy group, the study skills training group, and the waiting-list
control group.
H1: Cognitive behavioral therapy is more effective in reducing test anxiety
than either study skills training or a waiting-list control group.
Cognitive behavioral therapy focuses on anxiety-producing self-
statements (direct effect), whereas study skills training focuses on study and
test taking skills, which may be helpful in reducing anxiety (indirect effect).
The control group receives no treatment, thus there may be no significant
change in anxiety levels in the group.
67
(2) H0: There are no significant differences in procrastination between the
groups.
H1: Study skills training is more effective in reducing procrastination than
either cognitive behavioral therapy or a waiting-list control group.
The study skills program includes techniques for time management in
addition to other study skills, which may enable the subjects to organize their
time better, whereas the cognitive behavioral therapy program does not
include such techniques or skills. Also, no significant change is expected in
the control subjects, because they get no treatment.
(3) H0: There are no significant differences in academic performance between
the groups.
H1: Study skills training is more effective in improving academic
performance than either cognitive behavioral therapy or a waiting-list control
group.
Subjects in the study skills training group learn new study techniques,
thus they may get higher grades compared with subjects in the other two
groups.
(4) H0: There are no significant differences in satisfaction with study between
the groups.
H1: Study skills training is more effective in improving satisfaction with
study than either cognitive behavioral therapy or a waiting-list control group.
68
Subjects in the study skills training group may get higher grades, thus
they may be more satisfied with their academic achievements, relative to
subjects in the other two groups.
2. Method
2.1 Subjects
The population of the study consisted of 156 male students enrolled in the
10th grade in a Jordanian public school during the 2002/2003 school year. Pre-
test measures were administered under normal classroom conditions within the
sixth week of the first semester. These measures were the same used in the
correlational study.
The mean of student scores on the general test anxiety scale of the DAI
was 77.8. Students with scores of 79 and above on this scale were invited to
participate in treatment. They were 81 students. The subjects were rank ordered
on the basis of their scores on the procrastination scale, and then were assigned
to three groups. Specifically, the subject with the highest ranking was assigned
to group A the subject with the second highest ranking was assigned to group B
the subject with the third highest ranking was assigned to group C, followed by
A, B, C, A, etc. Thus, the number of subjects in each group was 27. The three
groups were assigned randomly to:
1) Cognitive behavioral therapy
2) Study skills training
3) Waiting-list control
69
2.2 Variables
The independent variable was: the group (a) cognitive behavioral therapy,
(b) study skills training and (c) waiting-list control.
The dependent variables were:
1. Dimensions of test anxiety
2. General test anxiety
3. Academic procrastination
4. Academic performance
5. Satisfaction with study
2.3 Treatment
The researcher served as a therapist for the treatment groups. Each group
was divided into two sections and each section received six 50-minute weekly
sessions. No subject missed more than one session.
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)
The CT program was designed:
a) To help anxious subjects become aware of the anxiety-producing self-
statements they emitted both before and during exams, and
b) To train them to develop new, positive self-statements that would facilitate
task attending in stressful situations.
The group members were informed that they could master their anxiety by
learning to control task-irrelevant self-statements that generate anxiety and
distract attention from the task at hand. They learned to replace negative self-
statements with positive alternatives.
During the first session, some preliminary questions about test anxiety
were asked, such as why do some students get anxious during exams?, what are
the manifestations of anxiety?. Then the goals of the program were explained,
70
followed by asking the group members about their expectations about the
program. Additionally, examples were offered to illustrate how our feelings can
be affected by our self-statements. As a homework assignment, the group
members were asked to keep a diary of their self-statements, feelings, and
behaviors in stressful situations.
In the second session, anxiety was explained to the group as resulting
from their negative self-statements. Then, the ABC model of Rational Emotive
Therapy was presented, and the group members used it in disputing three
anxiety-producing self-statements. Each statement was discussed first in small
groups and then there was a general discussion. Three other self-statements were
discussed in the third session, and another three in the fourth session. Most of
the statements discussed during the sessions were assigned by the therapist, one
of the statements given by one of the group mePEHUVLVWKDW ³P\ SDUHQWV ZLOO
NLOOPHLI,GRQ¶WJHWDJRRGJUDGH´
During the fifth session, other techniques for inhibiting task irrelevant
thoughts were offered, these techniques are: Using positive self-talk, convincing
oneself that test score is not a measure of self-worth, distinguishing between
demands and preferences and practicing thought stopping. In the sixth session,
the group was taught how to develop procedures to attend fully to the task.
+DQGRXWHQWLWOHG³DWWHQWLRQ-IRFXVLQJSURFHGXUHV´ZDV given to the group. At the
end of the session, there was a general discussion about the program (see
Appendix A).
Study Skills Training (SST)
The group was informed that test anxiety is often related to poor study
skills. In addition, poor academic performance is not caused completely by an
insufficient amount of time spent in study. It also depends on the quality of the
time spent. There is evidence that low performing students use inadequate,
71
incorrect, and ineffective methods of study. Therefore, they understand little of
what they study and remember little of what they understand. The active
participation in the SSC program would lead to more effective study skills and
habits, which may be helpful in reducing test anxiety, considering that test
anxiety is probably a natural reaction resulting from ineffective study methods.
The group members were asked to monitor their study behaviors and
record which problems they experience while studying. Topics covered in the
sessions were SQ3R method (Survey, Question, Read, Recite and Review),
techniques of time management, note-taking methods, test preparation
techniques and test-taking techniques.
Specifically, during the first session, the goals of the program were
explained and a general idea about the training sessions was given. The group
was taught the SQ3R method of studying. They were informed that they should
first survey the chapter by glancing quickly through the headings, tables and
illustrations. Then, they should question by turning headings into questions to be
answered while reading. They should read actively, focusing on completion of
the main ideas of the passage. They should recite the material in the section they
have just finished. Finally, they should review main points, concentrating on
passages not yet completely understood. At the end of the session, the group was
asked to review at home the five steps of the SQ3R method.
It is noteworthy that the importance of using underlining was emphasized.
The group was told that the purpose of underlining is to reduce the amount of
material to be studied for exams. If one underlines everything, one might as well
underline nothing. On the other hand, if one underlines almost nothing, it will
not be of much help either. It will be sufficient if one indicates the key words or
key phrases within a sentence. Of great importance is that underlining should
follow and not precede understanding.
In the second session, the group applied the SQ3R method to a history
textbook chapter. They were asked to apply thHVWHSVRI ³VXUYH\DQG TXHVWLRQ´
72
to the whole chapter, and the steps of read, recite and review only to one or two
passages. During the third session, the group members were taught how to
develop a time schedule and were informed that each one of them should follow
his time schedule until he habitually turns from one activity to another. Also, he
should follow the rules of study time. For instance, he should not wait until he is
in a suitable mood before studying.
The fourth session was devoted to explain the basic techniques of note-
taking, the group was informed that there are steps to be followed, when taking
notes. A student should record during class as many meaningful ideas as
possible, then he should reduce these ideas into key words listed in the recall
column, recite the main ideas, reflect on the material, and periodically review
the notes.
During the fifth session, principles relating to the timing of reviews were
discussed. The sixth session was devoted to test preparation and test-taking
strategies. First, the group discussed techniques relating to essay exams, then
they turned to objective exams. Handouts were distributed to the group during
the sessions (see appendix B).
Regarding the waiting-list control group, subjects received no treatment.
They were seen only at the pre- and post-tests.
Posttests were administered to all groups, two weeks after a six-week
treatment period, while final exams began three weeks after treatment had
HQGHG 6XEMHFWV¶ JUDGHV ZHUH REWDLQHG IURP WKH UHJLVWUDU¶V UHFRrds for the
semester during which treatment was conducted.
2.4 Data Analysis
Data were analyzed by one-ZD\$129$IROORZHG E\7XNH\¶VSRVWKRF
test. These tests were based on factor scores for the DAI subscales and for the
API. Regarding the DAI, the factor scores of the after-treatment data (posttest
data) of study II were estimated on the basis of the loadings derived from the
73
factor analyses conducted in study I. According to theory, API is viewed to be a
unidimensional scale. The API after-treatment (post test) factor scores were
estimated on the basis of the one factor loadings in study I.
3. Results
This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of a cognitive behavioral
therapy program and a study skills training program in reducing test anxiety and
procrastination and improving academic performance and satisfaction with
study.
Table 9 shows the means, standard deviations and differences between
pretest and posttest measurements. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA)
was conducted on pretest and posttest scores. There were no significant
differences (p < .05) between groups on the pretest scores. Table 10 presents the
one-way ANOVA summary for prettest scores. However, significant differences
(p < .05) were found between the groups on the posttest scores. Table 11
displays the one-way ANOVA summary for posttest scores. The results in this
Table indicate that there were significant differences between the groups on
measures of the cognitive manifestation, emotional manifestation, lack of
knowledge, recitation situations, repertory uncertainty, situation control, internal
stability, external stability, general test anxiety, procrastination, satisfaction with
study and grade point average. On the other hand, there were no significant
differences between the groups on measures of the physiological manifestation,
GDQJHU FRQWURO DQ[LHW\ UHSUHVVLRQ DQG DQ[LHW\ FRQWURO 7XNH\¶VSRVW-hoc test
was used to determine between which groups there are differences.
74
Table 9: Means, standard deviations and differences between pretest and
posttest measurements
___________________________________________________________________________________
Cognitive Behavioral therapy Study Skills Training Waiting-list Control
(n=27) (n=27) (n=27)
__________________ __________________ __________________
Note. COG = cognitive manifestation; EMO = emotional manifestation; PHY =
physiological manifestation; LK = lack of knowledge; RS = recitation situations; RU =
repertory uncertainty; DC = danger control; SC = situation control; AR = anxiety
repression; AC = anxiety control; IS = internal stability; ES = external stability; GTA =
general test anxiety; PR = procrastination; SS = satisfaction with study; G.P.A = grade
point average. Diff = posttest-pretest.
Diff.Post.Pre.Diff.Post.Pre.Diff.Post.Pre.Variable
.18.72.54-.78-.24.54-.93-.47.46MCOG
.26.96.70.00.75.75-.23.871.1SD
-.05.37.42-.46-.39.07-.19.02.21MEMO
.341.1.76.06.92.86-.18.81.99SD
.00.28.28-.07-.12-.05-.45-.16.29MPHY
.201.1.90.211.1.89-.22.77.99SD
.56.52-.04-.26-.2 0.06-.45-.32.13MLK
-.07.88.95-.09.85.94.101.11.0SD
-.04.39.43-.63-.24.39-.71-.15.56MRS
-.08.86.94.231.0.77.05
1.0.95SD
.34.45.11-.09-.15.06-.37-.30.07MRU
.181.1.92.28.94.66-.23.871.1SD
-.06-.03.03.21.14-.07-.20-.09.11MDC
.001.11.1.12.88.76.111.0.89SD
.19.46.27-.17-.39
-.22-.40-.07.33MSC
-.27.831.1.301.1.80-.16.841.0SD
.26.18-.08-.04 -.35-.31.28.17-.11MAR
.331.2.87-.03.73.76-.09.90.99SD
-.02.19.21-.26-.17.09-.11-.02.09MAC
-.17.83
1.0-.16.941.1.301.2.90SD
.21.60.39-.65-.38.27-.92-.21.71MIS
-.12.881.0.171.0.83-.06.85.91SD
.26.41.15-.22-.21.01-.75-.20.55MES
-.21.891.1.211.1.89-.22.881.1
SD
.08.49.41-.50-.29.21-.63-.21.42MGTA
.11.51.40.19.50.31.05.42.37SD
.45.38-.07-.21-.2 5-.04-.11-.13-.02MPR
.191.0.81-.04.83.87.061.0.94SD
.003.03.0.703.62.9
0.43.63.2MSS
-.02.981.0-.30.801.0-.20.74.94SD
-8.869.778.5-4.075.879.8-2.579.281.7MG.P.A
1.112.811.7-2.610.312.9-1.010.911.9SD
75
Table 10: One-way ANOVA summary for pretest scores
Variable Source Sum of Squares DF Mean Squares F P Eta2
COG Between groups .118 2 5.905E-02 .075 .927 .002
Within groups 61.093 78 .783
Total 61.211 80
EMO Between groups 1.587 2 .794 1.031 .361 .026
Within groups 60.034 78 .770
Total 61.621 80
PHY Between groups 2.043 2 1.021 1.188 .310 .030
Within groups 67.039 78 .859
Total 69.081 80
LK Between groups .393 2 .196 .208 .812 .005
Within groups 73.521 78 .943
Total 73.914 80
RS Between groups .422 2 .211 .266 .767 .007
Within groups 61.899 78 .794
Total 62.321 80
RU Between groups .455 2 .228 .254 .776 .006
Within groups 69.790 78 .895
Total 70.245 80
DC Between groups .452 2 .226 .251 .778 .006
Within groups 70.194 78 .900
Total 70.647 80
SC Between groups 4.878 2 2.439 2.611 .080 .063
Within groups 72.857 78 .934
Total 77.735 80
AR Between groups .818 2 .409 .529 .591 .013
Within groups 60.349 78 .774
Total 61.167 80
AC Between groups .235 2 .117 .115 .891 .003
Within groups 79.359 78 1.017
Total 79.594 80
IS Between groups 2.753 2 1.376 1.643 .200 .040
Within groups 65.330 78 .838
Total 68.083 80
ES Between groups 4.105 2 2.053 1.930 .152 .047
Within groups 82.979 78 1.064
Total 87.084 80
GTA Between groups .739 2 .370 2.787 .068 .067
Within groups 10.346 78 .133
Total 11.085 80
PR Between groups 3.818E-02 2 1.909E-02 .025 .975 .001
Within groups 59.820 78 .767
Total 59.858 80
SS Between groups 1.654 2 .827 .816 .446 .021
Within groups 79.037 78 1.013
Total 80.691 80
G.P.A Between groups 3.432 2 1.716 1.476 .235 .012
Within groups 90.667 78 1.162
Total 94.099 80
76
Table 11: One-way ANOVA summary for posttest scores
Variable Source Sum of Squares DF Mean Squares F P Eta2
COG Between groups 21.624 2 10.812 14.446 < .001 .270
Within groups 58.376 78 .748
Total 80.000 80
EMO Between groups 7.902 2 3.951 4.274 .017 .099
Within groups 72.098 78 .924
Total 80.000 80
PHY Between groups 3.240 2 1.620 1.646 .199 .040
Within groups 76.760 78 .984
Total 80.000 80
LK Between groups 10.985 2 5.493 6.208 .003 .137
Within groups 69.015 78 .885
Total 80.000 80
RS Between groups 6.389 2 3.194 3.385 .039 .080
Within groups 73.611 78 .944
Total 80.000 80
RU Between groups 8.554 2 4.277 4.669 .012 .107
Within groups 71.446 78 .916
Total 80.000 80
SC Between groups 9.873 2 4.937 5.491 .006 .123
Within groups 70.127 78 .899
Total 80.000 80
DC Between groups .788 2 .394 .388 .680 .010
Within groups 79.212 78 1.016
Total 80.000 80
AR Between groups 5.045 2 2.522 2.625 .079 .063
Within groups 74.955 78 .961
Total 80.000 80
AC Between groups 1.761 2 .881 .878 .420 .022
Within groups 78.239 78 1.003
Total 80.000 80
IS Between groups 14.779 2 7.390 8.838 < .001 .185
Within groups 65.221 78 .836
Total 80.000 80
ES Between groups 6.741 2 3.370 3.589 .032 .084
Within groups 73.259 78 .939
Total 80.000 80
GTA Between groups 9.876 2 4.938 21.285 < .001 .353
Within groups 18.096 78 .232
Total 27.972 80
PR Between groups 6.167 2 3.084 3.258 .044 .077
Within groups 73.833 78 .947
Total 80.000 80
SS Between groups 7.580 2 3.790 5.300 .007 .120
Within groups 55.778 78 .715
Total 63.358 80
G.P.A Between groups 1261.713 2 630.856 4.829 .011 .110
Within groups 10190.293 78 130.645
Total 11452.005 80
The results of the Tukey test are presented in the following tables.
77
3.1 Results Related to the First Hypothesis
Table 12: The results of the Tukey test for the cognitive manifestation variable.
Group Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy Study Skills Control
Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy -NSS
Study Skills -S
Control -
S = significant at p < .05. NS = not significant at p < .05.
Table 12 indicates that the cognitive behavioral therapy and the study
skills training groups showed significantly greater reductions in cognitive
manifestation as compared with the control group. However, no significant
difference was found between the two treatment groups. Figure 1 illustrates the
differences in the cognitive manifestation levels between the treatment and
control groups.
Figure 1. Differences in the cognitive manifestation levels between the treatment and control groups.
(cognitive manifestation: factor scores)
Group
controlstudy skillscognitive t herapy
,8
,6
,4
,2
-, 0
-, 2
-, 4
-, 6
78
Table 13: The results of the Tukey test for the emotional manifestation variable.
Group Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy Study Skills Control
Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy -NSNS
Study Skills -S
Control -
S = significant at p < .05. NS = not significant at p < .05.
Table 13 indicates that the study skills training group showed a
significantly greater reduction in emotional manifestation than did the control
group, however, no significant difference was found between the cognitive
behavioral therapy group and the control group or between the two treatment
groups. Figure 2 illustrates the differences in the emotional manifestation levels
between the treatment and control groups.
Figure 2. Differences in the emotional manifestation levels between the treatment and control groups.
(emotional manifestation: factor scores)
Group
controlstudy skillscognitive t herapy
,6
,4
,2
-, 0
-, 2
-, 4
-, 6
79
Table 14: The results of the Tukey test for the repertory uncertainty variable.
Group Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy Study Skills Control
Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy -
NS S
Study Skills -S
Control -
S = significant at p < .05. NS = not significant at p < .05.
Table 14 indicates that the cognitive behavioral therapy and the study
skills training groups showed significantly greater reductions in repertory
uncertainty as compared with the control group. No significant difference was
found between the two treatment groups. Figure 3 illustrates the differences in
the repertory uncertainty levels between the treatment and control groups.
Figure 3. Differences in the repertory uncertainty levels between the treatment and control groups.
(repertory uncertainty: factor scores)
Group
controls tudy s kil lscognitive t herapy
,6
,4
,2
0,0
-, 2
-, 4
80
Table 15: The results of the Tukey test for the lack of knowledge variable.
Group Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy Study Skills Control
Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy -NSS
Study Skills -S
Control -
S = significant at p < .05. NS = not significant at p < .05.
Table 15 indicates that the cognitive behavioral therapy and the study
skills training groups showed significantly greater reductions in lack of
knowledge compared to the control group. No significant difference was found
between the two treatment groups. Figure 4 illustrates the differences in the lack
of knowledge levels between the treatment and control groups.
Figure 4. Differences in the lack of knowledge levels between the treatment and control groups.
(lack of knowledge: factor scores)
Group
controlstudy skillscognit ive therapy
,6
,4
,2
0,0
-, 2
-, 4
81
Table 16: The results of the Tukey test for the variable of recitation situations.
Group Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy Study Skills Control
Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy -NSS
Study Skills -S
Control -
S = significant at p < .05. NS = not significant at p < .05.
Table 16 indicates that the cognitive behavioral therapy and the study
skills training groups showed significantly greater reductions in recitation
situations compared to the control group. No significant difference was found
between the two treatment groups. Figure 5 illustrates the differences in the
levels of recitation situations between the treatment and control groups.
Figure 5. Differences in the levels of recitation situations between the treatment and control groups
(recitation situations: factor scores)
Group
controlstudy skillscognitive t herapy
,5
,4
,3
,2
,1
-, 0
-, 1
-, 2
-, 3
82
Table 17: The results of the Tukey test for the situation control variable.
Group Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy Study Skills Control
Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy -NSS
Study Skills -S
Control -
S = significant at p < .05. NS = not significant at p < .05.
Table 17 indicates that the cognitive behavioral therapy and the study
skills training groups showed significantly greater reductions in situation control
when compared to the control group. No significant difference was found
between the two treatment groups. Figure 6 illustrates the differences in the
situation control levels between the treatment and control groups.
Figure 6. Differences in the situation control levels between the treatment and control groups.
(situation control: factor scores)
Group
controlstudy skillscognitive t herapy
,6
,4
,2
-, 0
-, 2
-, 4
-, 6
83
Table 18: The results of the Tukey test for the internal stability variable.
Group Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy Study Skills Control
Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy -NSS
Study Skills
-S
Control -
S = significant at p < .05. NS = not significant at p < .05.
Table 18 indicates that the cognitive behavioral therapy and the study
skills training groups showed significantly greater reductions in internal stability
compared with the control group. No significant difference was found between
the two treatment groups. Figure 7 illustrates the differences in the internal
stability levels between the treatment and control groups.
Figure 7. Differences in the internal stability levels between the treatment and control groups.
(internal stability: factor scores)
Group
controlstudy skillscognitive t herapy
,8
,6
,4
,2
-, 0
-, 2
-, 4
-, 6
84
Table 19: The results of the Tukey test for the external stability variable.
Group Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy Study Skills Control
Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy -NSS
Study Skills
-S
Control -
S = significant at p < .05. NS = not significant at p < .05.
Table 19 indicates that the cognitive behavioral therapy and the study
skills training groups showed significantly greater reductions in external
stability compared to the control group. No significant difference was found
between the two treatment groups. Figure 8 illustrates the differences in the
external stability levels between the treatment and control groups.
Figure 8. Differences in the external stability levels between the treatment and control groups.
(external stability: factor scores)
Group
controlstudy skillscognitive t herapy
,5
,4
,3
,2
,1
-, 0
-, 1
-, 2
-, 3
85
Table 20: The results of the Tukey test for the general test anxiety variable.
Group Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy Study Skills Control
Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy -NSS
Study Skills
-S
Control -
S = significant at p < .05. NS = not significant at p < .05.
Table 20 indicates that the cognitive behavioral therapy and the study
skills training groups showed significantly greater reductions in general test
anxiety compared to the control group. No significant difference was found
between the two treatment groups. Figure 9 illustrates the differences in the
general test anxiety levels between the treatment and control groups.
Figure 9. Differences in the general test anxiety levels between the treatment and control groups.
(general test anxiety: factor scores)
Thus, it seems that the first hypothesis was partially supported on most of
the test anxiety subscales and on the general test anxiety scale.
Group
controlstudy skillsc ognitive therapy
,6
,4
,2
0,0
-, 2
-, 4
86
3.2 Results Related to the Second Hypothesis
Table 21: The results of the Tukey test for the procrastination variable.
Group Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy Study Skills Control
Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy -NSNS
Study Skills -S
Control -
S = significant at p < .05. NS = not significant at p < .05.
Table 21 indicates that the study skills training group showed a
significantly greater reduction in procrastination than did the control group. No
significant difference was found between the cognitive behavioral therapy group
and the control group or between the two treatment groups. Thus, the hypothesis
was only partially supported. Figure 10 illustrates the differences in the
procrastination levels between the treatment and control groups.
Figure 10. Differences in the procrastination levels between the treatment and control groups.
(Procrastination: factor scores)
Group
controlstudy skillscognitive t herapy
,5
,4
,3
,2
,1
-, 0
-, 1
-, 2
-, 3
Group
controlstudy skillscognitive t herapy
,5
,4
,3
,2
,1
-, 0
-, 1
-, 2
-, 3
87
3.3 Results Related to the Third Hypothesis
Table 22: The results of the Tukey test for the grade point average variable.
Group Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy Study Skills Control
Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy -NSS
Study Skills -NS
Control -
S = significant at p < .05. NS = not significant at p < .05.
Table 22 shows that the cognitive behavioral therapy group demonstrated
significantly greater improvement in grade point average than did the control
group. No significant difference was found between the study skills training
group and the control group or between the two treatment groups. In this case,
the hypothesis was not supported. Figure 11 illustrates the differences in grade
point average between the treatment and control groups.
Figure 11. Differences in grade point average between the treatment and control groups.
Group
controls tudy s kil lscognit ive therapy
80
78
76
74
72
70
68
88
3.4 Results Related to the Fourth Hypothesis
Table 23 The results of the Tukey test for the variable of satisfaction with study.
Group Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy Study Skills Control
Cognitive
Behavioral Therapy -NSS
Study Skills -S
Control -
S = significant at p < .05. NS = not significant at p < .05.
Table 23 indicates that the cognitive behavioral therapy and the study
skills training groups showed significantly greater improvement in satisfaction
with study compared to the control group. No significant difference was found
between the two treatments. Thus, the hypothesis was partially confirmed.
Figure 12 illustrates the differences in the levels of satisfaction with study
between the treatment and control groups.
Figure 12. Differences in the levels of satisfaction with study between the treatment and control groups.
Group
controlstudy skillscognit ive therapy
3,8
3,6
3,4
3,2
3,0
2,8
Group
controlstudy skillsc ognitive therapy
3,8
3,6
3,4
3,2
3,0
2,8
89
4. Discussion
The results showed that both the cognitive behavioral therapy group and
the study skills training group were superior to the waiting-list control group on
measures of cognitive manifestation, repertory uncertainty, lack of knowledge,
recitation situations, situation control, internal stability, external stability and
general test anxiety. Contrary to expectation, only the cognitive behavioral
therapy group was superior to the waiting-list control group on the performance
measure.
Thus, study skills training can help anxious students study efficiently,
improve their motivation to study, use their time well, increase their satisfaction
with study, and reduce their anxiety, but since it does not cope with the negative
thoughts that interfere with their concentration, it may not be effective for
improving performance, while cognitive behavioral therapy can help these
students not only be aware of anxiety-evoking thoughts and self-statements, but
also teach them how to focus their attention fully on the task at hand rather than
to attend to self-oriented thoughts. In other words, when the negative self-
statements of test-anxious students are replaced with positive ones, this will help
them to be relaxed prior to and during exams. Studying while they are relaxed
may help them learn the material better, and remember it more easily. Therefore,
cognitive behavioral therapy can reduce anxiety, increase grades and as a result
improve satisfaction with study.
The results of this study are consistent with previous research suggesting
that cognitive behavioral therapy and/or study skills training may be more
effective than a waiting-list control condition in reducing test anxiety. They are
in accordance with the study by Meichenbaum (1972), who found that cognitive
modification treatment was effective in reducing test anxiety and improving
performance. The cognitive modification therapy used by Meichenbaum was a
combined program, an insight-oriented therapy with a modified desensitization
procedure, while the program used in the present study included only cognitive
90
procedures. This implies that the cognitive techniques may be as effective as
combined programs in the treatment of test anxiety and increasing grades. Also,
WKHVHUHVXOWVDJUHHZLWK+DKQORVHU¶VVWXG\ZKLFKUHSRUWHGWKDWFRJQLWLYH
restructuring led to a significant decrease in anxiety, however it was not more
effective than a treatment approach that combines a cognitive-attentional
restructuring process with training in progressive relaxation. The study by
Finger and Galassi (1977), which found that attentional treatment was effective
in reducing test anxiety.
These findings are consistent with the study by McMillan (1974), who
found that rational emotive therapy was effective in reducing the self-reports of
test-anxiety for high and moderate general anxiety students, but there was no
difference between rational emotive therapy and a control condition with respect
to the academic performance. It is noteworthy that rational emotive therapy was
one of the techniques used in the cognitive behavioral therapy program in the
SUHVHQWVWXG\0RUHRYHUWKHSUHVHQWUHVXOWVDJUHHZLWK2VDUFKXN¶VVWXG\
which reported that a cognitive restructuring group demonstrated a large
reduction in test anxiety on the assessment given immediately after the
termination of treatment and it maintained this reduction after two weeks.
+ROUR\G¶VVWXG\ZKLFKIRXQGWKDWFRJQLWLYHWKHUDS\ZDVPRUHHIIHFWLYH
in reducing anxiety and improving grade point average than systematic
desensitization, a combination of cognitive therapy and systematic
desensitization and a control condition. The study by Fabick (1977), which
examined the effectiveness of cognitive modification, desensitization, and
mantra meditation in the treatment of test anxiety. It was found that all three
treDWPHQWVVLJQLILFDQWO\UHGXFHGWHVWDQ[LHW\DQGJHQHUDODQ[LHW\.DW]¶V
study, which showed that rational emotive therapy was significantly more
effective in reducing test anxiety than either no-treatment condition or relaxation
placebo.
91
These resulWVDUHFRQVLVWHQWZLWK9DJJ¶VVWXG\ZKLFKLQYHVWLJDWHG
the effectiveness of biofeedback in combination with cognitive coping,
biofeedback only, and cognitive coping only, in reducing test anxiety. It was
found that the two groups that received cognitive coping training showed
significant reductions in test anxiety. The study by Kaplan et al. (1979), which
VKRZHG WKDW WKH FRJQLWLYH FRPSRQHQW RI 0HLFKHQEDXP¶V FRJQLWLYH-
behavior modification is more effective than the desensitization component or
the combination of the cognitive and desensitization. The study by Goldfried et
al. (1978), who found that systematic rational restructuring was more effective
than a prolonged exposure condition and a waiting-list control condition in
reducing test anxiety.
The present results agree with the study by Smith (1979), which reported
WKDW0HLFKHQEDXP¶VFRJQLWLYHEHKDYLRUPRGLILFDWLRQLQFRPELQDWLRQZLWKVWXG\
skills training was more effective in reducing test anxiety than study skills alone
or a waiting-list control group. They found that no treatment led to a significant
improvement in academic performance. These findings are partially consistent
with those of the present study suggesting that cognitive behavioral therapy was
more effective than a waiting-list control condition. The present findings are
DOVR FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK 1DXKHLP¶V VWXG\ ZKLFK LQYHVWLJDWHGWKH
effectiveness of group anxiety management training, group negative practice and
group cognitive therapy in the reduction of test anxiety. The three treatment
methods were significantly effective in reducing test anxiety. The study by
Smithy-Willis (1981), who found that a cognitive modification program and a
pseudotherapy technique significantly reduced anxiety and increased test
performance. The study by Wise and Haynes (1983), which found that both
rational restructuring and attentional training were superior to a waiting-list
control group in reducing test anxiety and improving performance.
$OOHQ¶V VWXG\ ZKLFK UHSRUWHG WKDW JURXS-administered and self-
administered relaxation and study counseling were equally effective in reducing
92
anxiety and improving grades, and significantly better than the control. The
study by Bander et al. (1982), which showed that study skills training produced
significant improvements on self-reported mathematics anxiety and mathematics
performance. The study by Sapp (1989), who reported that autosuggestion
therapy combined with study skills counseling, relaxation therapy combined
with study skills counseling, and nondirective therapy were all more effective
than a control group in reducing test anxiety and improving academic
performance.
The study by Decker and Russell (1981), who found that a cue-controlled
relaxation and cognitive-restructuring group and a study-skills group showed
significant improvement over a waiting-list control group on self-report
debilitative test anxiety and irrational thinking. Study skills training led to the
most improvement in grade point averages. The study by Dendato and Diener
(1986), which reported that relaxation/cognitive therapy was effective in
reducing anxiety, but failed to improve classroom test scores, while a
combination of relaxation/cognitive therapy and study skills training reduced
anxiety and improved performance, compared to the no-treatment control
condition and was significantly more effective than was either treatment alone.
In the combined program, subjects were given a chance to learn the skills
necessary for effective study, at the same time they were taught how to cope
with anxiety-evoking thoughts. Perhaps that is why they showed greater
improvement in anxiety and performance. The present results are also consistent
with the study by Jones (1988), which showed that both study skills training and
cognitive modification were equally effective in reducing self-reported test
anxiety. No treatment led to significant improvement in grade point average.
'RJDUOX¶VVWXG\ZKLFKIRXQGWKDWERWKFRJQLWLYHWKHUDS\LQFRPELQDWLRQ
with study skills training (CT+SST), and systematic desensitization in
combination with study skills training (SD+SST) made significant
improvements from pretest to posttest in anxiety reduction and in study skills.
93
Only the group that received CT+SST demonstrated a significant improvement
in academic performance. It should be considered that some of these studies
showed the efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy and study skills training in
combined programs.
Obviously, the present results agree with those of the above studies with
respect to the treatment of test anxiety, but with regard to the academic
performance, the matter is different from one study to another.
However, the results of this study contrast with previous studies suggesting
that cognitive behavioral therapy and/or study skills training may not be more
effective than a waiting-list control condition in reducing test anxiety. They are
in contrast with the study by Horne and Matson (1977), which showed that
modeling was most effective in decreasing test anxiety followed by
desensitization and then flooding. Study skills counseling was significantly more
effective than flooding or a waiting-list control group in improving final grades.
Some studies indicated that study skills training was effective neither in
reducing test an[LHW\QRULQLPSURYLQJJUDGHV2VWHUKRXVH¶VVWXG\ZKLFK
found that desensitization was more effective than study skills training and a
waiting-list control group in reducing test anxiety. Control group received
significantly higher examination scores than did study skills group. The study by
Cornish and Dilley (1973), who found that study skills counseling was not
significantly different from the control group with respect to the levels of test
anxiety and grade point average. This is in contrast with the present study, in
which study skills training was effective in reducing anxiety.
These results also contrast with the study by Lent and Russel (1978), which
found that systematic desensitization in combination with a study-skills course,
and cue-controlled desensitization in combination with a study-skills course
were superior to study-skills training alone in reducing test anxiety and state
anxiety. Both multicomponent groups showed significantly greater improvement
in grade point averages than no treatment. The study by Altmaier and
94
Woodward (1981), which showed that vicarious desensitization resulted in
lower test and trait anxiety than study skills training alone or a waiting-list
control. There was no significant difference between the study skills group and
the control group on test or trait anxiety. No differences were found between the
JURXSV RQ DFDGHPLF SHUIRUPDQFH PHDVXUHV 0LQRU¶V VWXG\ ZKLFK
showed that no significant differences were found between cognitive therapy,
study skills training, a combination of cognitive therapy and study skills
training, pseudotherapy control procedure and a waiting-list control group on
self-report measures of test anxiety. Also, no treatment led to significant
improvement in academic performance. This is perhaps because of the small
number of subjects in this study. 51 subjects were assigned to 5 groups.
Moreover, the present results contrast with the study by Bosse (1987), who
found that no differences were found between relaxation and cognitive
counseling, study skills counseling, and a combined program in reducing test
anxiety, improving study skills and habits or improving grade point average.
Although the circumstances of this study (i.e., the number of training sessions,
age of subjects, treatment methods) are similar to those in the present study,
these results are inconsistent with the present results. Bosse claimed that there
were some factors that might have contributed to the nonsignificant results: the
strict entrance criteria, a relatively small sample size, and the difficulty in
motivating high school students to change attitudes and behaviors in a brief
WKHUDS\SURJUDP/XFNHQV¶VVWXG\ZKLFKVKRZHGWKDWVXEMHFWVUHFHLYLQJ
cognitive therapy reported higher facilitating anxiety than study counseling
subjects. Study counseling subjects earned significantly higher grade point
averages than the commitment and cognitive groups. It should be noted that this
result not only contrasts with those of the present study, but also with those of
several other studies showing that cognitive behavioral therapy was effective in
increasing grades, whereas study skills training was not.
95
Generally, the results of the present study give further support to the
conclusion that almost any type of treatment seems to be effective in reducing
self-reported test anxiety, but changing academic performance is another matter.
One of the interesting findings in this study is that the study skills training
group was superior to the control group in decreasing procrastination. This
refers to the effectiveness of the strategies included in the study skills training
program. Subjects who participated in the program were taught the SQ3R
method of studying to help them read with understanding. They were taught
time-management techniques, each one of them developed a time schedule in
which he wrote the activities of eating, sleeping, class hours, outside work, the
hours during which each of them expects to study each subject, and hours of
free-time. They were informed that a student should follow the time schedule
until he habitually turns from each activity to the next one. He should not wait
until he is in a suitable mood before studying, he should begin studying at his
regularly set time. In addition to this, he should monitor his study behavior.
Although the study skills training group showed greater improvement than
the control group in procrastination, there was no difference between the two
groups in academic performance. This finding agrees with that of Ziesat,
Rosenthal and White (1978), who examined the effects of stimulus control, self-
reinforcement, and a combination of the two in treating procrastination of
studying and improving achievement. They reported that all treatments were
more effective than the control condition in reducing procrastination, but neither
control nor experimental conditions led to any significant change in grade point
average. It also agrees with the findings of Richards (1975), who reported that a
combination of self-monitoring and study skills advice was effective in
modifying behavior of studying.
However, the present study contrasts with that of Beneke and Harris
(1972), which found that subjects who participated in a self-control procedure,
which utilized the stimulus control procedures, self-reinforcement and
96
punishment, and the SQ3R method of studying, showed significant
improvements in grade point average for the three semesters following the
study, when compared with those who did not participate. It also contrasts with
the findings of Green (1982), who reported that self-monitoring plus self-reward
was effective in producing increases in academic behaviors and grades and in
producing decreases in related procrastinative behaviors. Future research should
focus on new treatment methods that may be more effective for reducing
procrastination and improving grades.
The present study found that treating test anxiety did not reduce
procrastination. Clearly, cognitive behavioral therapy was superior to the control
group in reducing anxiety, but it was not effective with regard to procrastination.
Thus, students may procrastinate not because of the same negative thoughts that
lead to test anxiety, but because of other thoughts result in procrastination.
These thoughts should be identified and discussed with procrastinating students
to reduce their procrastination. Greco (1985; cited in Ferrari et al., 1995, pp. 36)
found that procrastinators are more likely to engage in negative self-talk,
especially regarding excuse making. Ferrari et al., (1995) found, based on
clinical experience, that academic procrastinators typically make five cognitive
distortions, which promote and maintain their task avoidance, these five
cognitive distortions are: 1. Overestimation of time left to perform tasks, 2.
Underestimation of time required to complete tasks, 3. Overestimation of future
motivational states, 4. Misreliance on the necessity of emotional congruence to
succeed at task, and 5. Belief that working when not in the mood to work is
unproductive or suboptimal.
The above cognitive distortions, which are frequent in most procrastinators,
were not included in the present cognitive behavioral therapy program. This may
explain why it failed to reduce procrastination. Since the negative self-
statements of procrastinators may be different from those of test anxious
97
students, the cognitive behavioral therapy programs designed for procrastinators
should be different from those designed for test-anxious individuals.
Regarding the study skills program, it was developed to help anxious
students learn strategies necessary for effective learning, which may be useful
for reducing test anxiety and/or procrastination. Therefore, one cannot conclude
that procrastination was reduced in the study skills training group as a result of
the treatment of test anxiety or vice versa.
The experimental design of this study did not include an attention-placebo
condition to control for the effects of attention and suggestion. Future research
on test-anxious students would be enhanced by including an appropriate placebo
condition to insure that the findings were completely attributable to the
treatments. Replication of the study using multiple therapists would also be
highly desirable. Perhaps the treatment programs used in this study have
significant effects on other variables such as general anxiety, irrational thinking,
locus of control, self-esteem, self-acceptance or depression. This is left for
future research.
98
IV. General Discussion
This investigation included two studies. The first study attempted to
investigate the relationships between test anxiety, procrastination, academic
performance and satisfaction with study, while the second study tried to
compare the effectiveness of two treatment methods in reducing test anxiety.
Both studies were conducted on samples of high school male students in Jordan.
The correlational study replicated the results of previous studies that
investigated the relationship of test anxiety to academic performance,
procrastination and/or satisfaction with study. This is one of the few studies that
examined the relationship between test anxiety and satisfaction with study in
school students. The results of this study indicated that test anxiety was
associated with negative academic consequences. Test anxious students perform
poorly, procrastinate more, and are less satisfied with their academic
achievements, compared to their low-test anxious counterparts. The present
results are consistent with those of other studies, indicating the strength of the
relationships between the variables in question.
Cognitive behavioral therapy and study skills training have been widely
used for test anxiety and other academic problems. In the present experimental
study, these methods were used in two treatment programs, but with new
designs. The components of each program were organized in a way that was
easy for students to understand. All procedures, techniques and activities related
to each program were divided into six weekly sessions to give subjects enough
time to practice what they learn during the sessions. The number of sessions was
equal for both experimental groups, so that the differences in the effects between
the treatment and control groups attribute only to the different treatments. The
study examined the effects of the treatments not only on test anxiety, but also on
procrastination, academic performance and satisfaction with study. Regarding
the effectiveness of these treatments, it was measured through a test anxiety
scale, with a new design too, along with other scales. The results of this study
99
showed that cognitive behavioral therapy was very beneficial for those students
who suffer from test anxiety and perform poorly on exams, while study skills
training was more helpful for students who suffer from test anxiety and
procrastination. Both treatments were effective in improving satisfaction with
study.
The present results demonstrated that procrastination was inversely
correlated with academic performance. However, this result should be viewed
with caution. It would be hasty to conclude that reduction of procrastination
leads to the improvement of performance. The study skills training group
showed a great reduction in procrastination, but they did not show improvement
in academic performance. This suggests that there are factors other than
procrastination that affect performance. The present results also demonstrated
that academic performance was highly affected by lack of concentration or
distraction of attention. Accordingly, students should learn how to manage their
time effectively as well as how to focus their attention on the work at hand, so
that they can improve their academic performance. Counseling programs
designed to reduce procrastination should include, in addition to time
management strategies, attention-focusing techniques to be more effective.
On the other hand, it was found that improving performance did not lead
to reductions in procrastination. The cognitive behavioral therapy group showed
great improvement in academic performance, but they did not demonstrate a
significant reduction in procrastination. This may indicate that there are causes
of procrastination other than fear of failure or task aversiveness. School students
may procrastinate, because they may find something more interesting for them
than performing academic assignments. That is, they may like to do their
academic tasks, but they also prefer other more enjoyable activities.
Results of both studies support the interference model of the effect of
anxiety on performance, but do not support the skills-deficit model of the effect
of anxiety. The correlational study showed that there was a significant negative
100
correlation between repertory uncertainty and G.P.A, while there was no
correlation between lack of knowledge and G.P.A, indicating that lack of
concentration while preparing for exams is related to poor academic
performance, whereas feeling of lack of knowledge before or during exams is
not related to it. On the other hand, the experimental study found that cognitive
behavioral therapy, which focuses on the anxiety-producing self-statements, was
effective in reducing anxiety and improving grades, that is, teaching test-anxious
students how to concentrate better, when they prepare for exams and take
exams, can help them reduce their anxiety and increase their grades, while study
skills training, which focuses on the study techniques, was found to be effective
in reducing test anxiety, but it did not improve performance. This contrasts the
skills-deficit model that assumes that students, who feel or perceive that their
study skills are insufficient, may become anxious and then perform poorly. In
other words, teaching test-anxious students the skills needed for effective study
may help them reduce their anxiety and improve their grades.
Again, it should be emphasized that it is not enough for students to learn
the skills needed for effective study, so that they can increase their grades. They
should also learn how to concentrate when they perform their academic tasks.
Students with good study skills may have the knowledge required to accomplish
their tasks, but this knowledge should be accompanied with good concentration
in order to be fruitful. This demonstrates the importance of counseling in
helping students achieve this goal. Counselors should be qualified to teach
students how to study effectively and how to focus their attention on the tasks at
hand.
The findings showed that general test anxiety was significantly correlated
with recitation situations, suggesting that students high in test anxiety are also
high in social anxiety. They feel anxious when they take exams and when they
have to say or present something in front of their colleagues or in front of
strangers. In this context, the results also demonstrated that treating test anxiety
101
through a study skills training program or through a cognitive behavioral
therapy program led to reductions in social anxiety (recitation situations). This
indicates that these treatment methods are effective in helping students think
positively during evaluative situations.
When comparing the results of the present experimental study with those
of other studies, enough attention should be given to the elements of the
treatment programs designed to achieve the goals of each of these studies. The
literature of test anxiety shows that almost all studies that used study skills
training programs are similar regarding the components of these programs. In
each of these studies, one finds almost the same techniques necessary for
effective learning (i.e., SQ3R, note-taking, time management, etc.). Thus, it is
fair to compare the results of these studies with each other. However, not all
studies that used cognitive behavioral therapy programs for treating test anxiety
are similar with respect to the components of these programs. Some cognitive
programs included relaxation techniques or desensitization (e.g., Meichenbaum,
1972); other programs included only cognitive procedures (e.g., Holroyd, 1976).
To make the comparison fair, the components of the cognitive programs should
be taken in consideration.
The test anxiety inventory (DAI) used in this investigation was successful
in demonstrating the strength of the relationships between test anxiety and other
variables in Jordanian high school students. This means that the DAI can be
used for achieving the purposes of correlational studies aiming to examine the
relationship of test anxiety to other personality variables. In addition, this scale
showed significant differences in test anxiety between the treatment and control
groups, indicating that it is also suitable for experimental studies. It is worth
noting that the DAI includes the traditional dimensions of test anxiety (i.e.,
worry and emotionality) and other new dimensions, which may be equally
important. It should be stressed that in the DAI, worry is functionally interpreted
as a stability factor, while emotionality is functionally interpreted as a
102
manifestation of test anxiety. Although the DAI consists of 12 subscales, it is
easy to apply. Accordingly, this scale is recommended for future studies as a
measure of test anxiety.
Participants, in both studies, were pleased to fill out the inventories. They
noticed that these inventories focused on the problems that they experience.
Also, students who participated in treatment were pleased to be invited to
participate as group members. They were very enthusiastic and interested in the
topics discussed during the training sessions. They proposed that the treatment
programs should be applied to large numbers of students, indicating that they
were convinced of the usefulness of these programs. In fact, both treatment
methods are important for test anxious students. Cognitive behavioral therapy
was found to be effective in treating test anxiety and improving performance,
while study skills training was found to be effective in reducing test anxiety and
procrastination. When students feel less anxious, learn to perform their academic
tasks without delay and get higher grades, they will certainly be more satisfied
with their studies and more successful in their lives.
The present experimental study showed that cognitive behavioral therapy
and study skills training were effective in reducing test anxiety. Does the
literature of test anxiety indicate that there are more effective techniques?
Several studies compared the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral
therapy and/or study skills training with systematic desensitization and/or
relaxation (behavioral techniques) in the treatment of test anxiety. The available
studies showed that cognitive therapy was either as effective as (see McMillan,
1974; Osarchuk, 1976; Fabick, 1977) or more effective than systematic
desensitization (see Meichenbaum, 1972; Holroyd, 1976; Kaplan et al., 1979;
Leal et al., 1981). Also, it was either as effective as (see Hanloser, 1974) or
more effective than relaxation (see Katz, 1978). On the other hand, the studies
demonstrated that study skills training was less effective than systematic
desensitization (see Osterhouse, 1972; Cornish & Dilley, 1973; Altmaier &
103
Woodward, 1981), whereas it was either as effective as (see Allen, 1971) or less
effective than relaxation (see Bander et al., 1982). From the literature review, it
can be concluded that the behavioral techniques may be more effective than
study skills training, but they are as effective as or less effective than cognitive
behavioral therapy. The design of the present experimental study did not include
a combined program. Therefore, only the efficacy of individual techniques is
considered in this brief review.
As recommendations for counseling, the present cognitive behavioral
therapy program is designed to be used with a group of students. It includes
anxiety-producing thoughts that should be discussed in a group setting. The
group members are expected to be motivated to participate in discussing these
thoughts or self-statements, because they will feel that many students have such
thoughts. It will not be embarrassing for them to talk freely about their own
experiences and feelings related to the assigned thoughts. Counselors can use
such a program with a group of test anxious students (group counseling). This
will save the time of counselors, and it will be more beneficial for the group
members. However, if a student asks a counselor to help him/her reduce his/her
anxiety (individual counseling), the counselor may not need to use all program
components, because he can ask the student directly about his/her anxiety-
evoking thoughts and the circumstances under which he/she suffers from
anxiety, and then he can determine a suitable treatment plan. The same cannot
be said regarding the study skills training program. It can be used with both an
individual student and with a group of students. Apparently, it includes skills
needed for effective study, which are important for all students. These skills can
be offered in different forms.
Finally, future research is needed to replicate the results of these two
studies in other settings, they may be important for counselors to help anxious
students be more confident and satisfied with their studies, and to provide
parents with suggestions for reducing anxiety in their children.
104
V. Abstract
This research consisted of a descriptive correlational study and an
experimental study.
The correlational study investigated the relationships between test anxiety,
procrastination, academic performance and satisfaction with study in a sample
of 573 high school male students selected from four schools in Jordan. Pearson
product moment correlation coefficients were calculated to determine the
relationships between these variables. The results showed a significant positive
correlation between test anxiety and procrastination (r= .29). Significant
negative correlations were found between test anxiety and grade point average
(G.P.A) (r= -.22), test anxiety and satisfaction with study (r= -.27),
procrastination and G.P.A (r= -.24), and procrastination and satisfaction with
study (r= -.33). No correlation was found between feeling of lack of knowledge,
as an anxiety-producing condition, and G.P.A (r= .05), whereas a significant
correlation was found between repertory uncertainty and G.P.A (r= -.22).
On the other hand, the experimental study of this research examined the
effectiveness of a cognitive behavioral therapy program and a study skills
training program in reducing test anxiety and procrastination and improving
academic performance and satisfaction with study. 81 students were selected
from a group of 156 tenth grade male students on the basis of their scores on the
general test anxiety scale of the Differential Test Anxiety Inventory (DAI; Rost
and Schermer, 1997). These students were rank ordered based on their scores on
a short form of the Aitken Procrastination Inventory (API; Aitken, 1982), and
then assigned to three groups. These groups were randomly assigned to:
cognitive behavioral therapy, study skills training and waiting-list control.
Cognitive behavioral therapy aimed to help subjects become aware of the
anxiety-evoking self-statements they emitted both before and during exams, and
105
to train them to develop new, positive self-statements that would facilitate task
attending, whereas study skills training aimed to teach subjects the skills
necessary for effective learning, namely SQ3R method of studying, techniques
of time management, note-taking methods, test preparation techniques and test-
taking techniques. All subjects receiving treatment met for a total of six 50-
minute treatment sessions spanning over six weeks. The author served as a
therapist for the treatment groups.
Pretest/ posttest measures were taken on the DAI, API, G.P.A and a
single-item question on student satisfaction with study. The data were analyzed
using one-way analysis of variance. No significant differences existed between
groups at pretest. However, the results indicated that both treatment groups
made significant improvements from pretest to posttest in test anxiety and
satisfaction with study when compared to the waiting-list control group. The
study skills training group showed a significantly greater reduction in
procrastination than did the control group, while the cognitive behavioral
therapy group was superior to the control group in improving academic
performance. Of great importance is the finding that the cognitive behavioral
therapy program significantly reduced test anxiety, but it did not reduce
procrastination. Thus, treatment of anxiety is necessary but not sufficient for
reducing procrastination.
Overall, the results of both studies were interpreted as giving support to
the interference model of the debilitating effect of anxiety on performance.
References
Ahlawat, K.S. (1989). Psychometric properties of the Yarmouk Test Anxiety
Inventory. In R. Schwarzer, H.M. Van der Ploeg, & C.D. Spielberger
(Eds.), Advances in test anxiety research Vol. 6 (pp. 263-279). Lisse, The
Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
106
Aitken, M. (1982). A personality profile of the college student procrastinator.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
Allen, G.J. (1971). Effectiveness of study counseling and desensitization in
alleviating test anxiety in college students. Journal of Abnormal
Psychology, 77, 282-289.
Allen, G.J. (1973). Treatment of test anxiety by group administered and self-
administered relaxation and study counseling. Behavior Therapy, 4,349-
360.
Altmaier, E.M., & Woodward, M. (1981). Group vicarious desensitization of
test anxiety. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 467-469.
anxiety: New concepts, methods, and applications. New York: Wiley.
Bander, R.S., Russell, R.K., & Zamonstny, K.P. (1982). A comparison of cue-
controlled relaxation and study skills counseling in the treatment of
mathematics anxiety. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 96-103.
Beck, A. (1970). Cognitive therapy: Nature and relation to behavior therapy.
Behavior Therapy, 1, 184-200.
Beck, A.T., & Emory, G. (1985). Anxiety disorders and phobias: A cognitive
perspective. New York: Basic Books.
Beneke, W. M., & Harris, M. B. (1972). Teaching self-control of study
behavior. Behavior Research and Therapy 10,35-41.
Benjamin, M., McKeachie, W. J., Lin, Y., & Holinger, D.P. (1981). Test
anxiety: Deficits in information processing. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 73, 816-824.
Beswick, G., Rothblum, E., & Mann, L. (1988). Psychological antecedents of
student procrastination. Australian Psychologist, 23, 207-217.
Bosse, J.F. (1987). Treatment specificity for test anxious high school students: A
comparison of relaxation and cognitive counseling, study skills counseling,
and a combined program in the treatment of test anxiety. Dissertation
Abstracts International, 47 (7-A), 2506.
107
Burka, J. B., & Yuen, L.M. (1983). Procrastination: Why you do it, what to do
about it. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Carver, C.S., & Scheier, M.F. (1989). Expectancies and coping: From test
anxiety to pessimism. Advances in test anxiety research, Vol. 6 (pp. 3-11).
Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Comunian, A.L. (1989). Some characteristics of relations among depression,
anxiety, and self-efficacy. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 69, 755-764.
Cornish, R.D., & Dilley, J.S. (1973). Comparison of three methods of reducing
test anxiety: Systematic desensitization, implosive therapy, and study
counseling. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 20, 499-503.
Covington, M.V., & Omelich, C.L. (1987). Item difficulty and test performance
among high-anxious and low-anxious students. In R. Schwarzer, H.M. Van
der Ploeg, & C.D. Spielberger (Eds.), Advances in test anxiety research,
Vol. 5 (pp. 127-136). Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Culler, R.E., & Holahan, C.J. (1980). Test anxiety and academic performance:
The effects of study related behaviors. Journal of Educational Psychology,
72,16-20.
'¶$OHOLR :$ 0XUUD\ (- Cognitive therapy for test anxiety.
Cognitive Therapy and Research ,5, 299-307.
Decker, T.W., & Russell, R.K. (1981). Comparison of cue-controlled relaxation
and cognitive restructuring versus study-skills counseling in treatment of
test-anxious college underachievers. Psychological Reports, 49, 459-469.
Deffenbacher, J.L. (1977). Relationship of worry and emotionality to
performance on the Miller Analogies Test. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 69, 191-195.
Deffenbacher, J.L. (1980). Worry and emotionality in test anxiety. In I.G.
Sarason, (Ed.) Test anxiety: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 111-
124). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
108
Dendato, K.M., & Diener, D. (1986). Effectiveness of cognitive/relaxation
therapy and study-skills training in reducing self-reported anxiety and
improving the academic performance of test-anxious students. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 33, 131-135.
Desiderato, O., & Koskinen, P. (1969). Anxiety, study habits, and academic
achievement. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 16, 162-165.
Doctor, R. M., & Altman, F. (1969). Worry and emotionality as components of
test anxiety: Replication and further data. Psychological Reports, 24,563-
568.
Dogarlu, J.G. (1991). A comparison of cognitive therapy plus study skills with
systematic desensitization plus study skills in the treatment of test anxiety.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 52 (4-A), 1259.
Effert, B., & Ferrari, J.R. (1989). Decisional procrastination: Examining
personality correlates. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 4,151-
156.
Ellis, A., & Knaus, W.J. (1977). Overcoming procrastination. New York:
Institute for Rational Living.
Erdell, M. (1983). Effects of cognitive restructuring and relaxation training upon
test anxious students. Dissertation Abstracts International, 44 (6-B), 1957.
Fabick, S.D. (1977). The relative effectiveness of systematic desensitization,
cognitive modification, and mantra meditation in the reduction of test
anxiety. Dissertation Abstracts International, 37 (8-A), 4862.
Ferrari, J. R., Johnson, J. L., & McCown, W.G. (1995). Procrastination and task
avoidance. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Ferrari, J.R. (1991). Compulsive procrastination: Some self-reported
characteristics. Psychological Reports, 68, 455-458.
Ferrari, J.R. (1992). Procrastinators and perfect behavior: An exploratory factor
analysis of self-presentation, self-awareness, and self-handicapping
components. Journal of Research in Personality, 26,75-84.
109
Ferrari, J.R. (1994) Dysfunctional procrastination and its relationship with self-
esteem, interpersonal dependency, and self defeating behaviors.
Personality and Individual Differences, 17, 673-679.
Finger, R., & Galassi, J.P. (1977). Effects of modifying cognitive versus
emotionality responses in the treatment of test anxiety. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 45, 280-287.
Freeman, A., Pretzer, J., Fleming, B., & Simon, K.M. (1990). Clinical
applications of cognitive therapy. New York: Plenum Press.
Freud, S. (1953). The ego and the id. In Standard Edition, 19:3 66 (James
Strachey, Trans.). London: Hogarth Press and the Institute of
Psychoanalysis. (Original work published 1923).
Galassi, J.P., Frierson Jr., H.T., & Sharer, R. (1981). Behavior of high,
moderate, and low test anxious students during an actual test situation.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49, 51-62.
Goldfried, M.R., & Davison, G.C. (1976). Clinical behavior therapy.New
York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Goldfried, M.R., Linehan, M.M., & Smith, J.L. (1978). Reduction of test anxiety
through cognitive restructuring. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 46,32-39.
Greco, P. (1985). Self-statements of chronic procrastinators. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, California School of Professional Psychology, San
Diego, CA.
Green, K.E. (1981). Test anxiety level and test format preference. Psychological
Reports, 48, 537-538.
Green, L. (1982). Minority students' self-control of procrastination. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 29, 636-644.
Hahnloser, R.M. (1974). A comparison of cognitive restructuring and
progressive relaxation in test anxiety reduction. Dissertation Abstracts
International, 35 (3-A), 1444-1445.
110
Harris, R.N., Snyder, C.R., Higgins, R.L, & Schrag, J.L. (1986). Enhancing the
prediction of self-handicapping. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 51, 1191-1199.
Helmke, A. & Schrader, F.W. (2000). Procrastination im Studium-
Erscheinungsformen und motivationale Bedingungen. In U. Schiefele & K.
P. Wild (Hrsg.), Interesse und Lernmotivation: Untersuchungen zu
Entwicklung, Förderung und Wirkung. Münster: Waxmann, 207-223.
Hembree, R. (1988). Correlates, causes, effects, and treatment of test anxiety.
Review of Educational Research, 58,47-77.
Hodapp, V. (1991). Das Prüfungsängstlichkeitsinventar TAI-G: Eine erweiterte
und modifizierte Version mit vier Komponenten. [The Test Anxiety
Inventory TAI-G: An expanded and modified version with four
components]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 5, 121-130.
Hodapp, V., & Henneberger, A. (1983). Test anxiety, study habits, and
academic performance. In H.M. van der Ploeg, R. Schwarzer & C. D.
Spielberger (Eds.), Advances in test anxiety research, Vol. 2 (pp. 119-127).
Lisse: Swets and Zeitlinger.
Hollandsworth, J.G., Glazeski, R.C., Kirkland, K., Jones, G., & Van Norman,
L.R. (1979). An analysis of the nature and effects of test anxiety: cognitive,
behavioral, and Physiological components. Cognitive Therapy and
Research, 3, 165-180.
Holroyd, K.A. (1976). Cognition and desensitization in the group treatment of
test anxiety. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 44, 991-1001.
Holroyd, K.A., Westbrook, T., Wolf, M., & Badhorn, E. (1978). Performance,
cognition, and physiological responding in test anxiety. Journal of
Abnormal Psychology, 87, 442-451.
Horne, A.M., & Matson, I.L. (1977). A comparison of modeling,
desensitization, flooding, study skills, and control groups for reducing test
anxiety. Behavior Therapy, 8, 1-8.
111
Hunsley, J. (1987). Internal dialogue during academic examinations. Cognitive
Therapy and Research, 11, 653-664.
Hymen, S. P., & Warren, R. (1978). An evaluation of rational-emotive imagery
as a component of rational-emotive therapy in the treatment of test anxiety.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 46, 847-853.
Janis, I.L., & Mann, L. (1977). Decision-making: A psychological analysis of
conflict, choice, and commitment. New York: Free Press.
Jones, D.F. (1988). Cognitive modification and study skills training in the
treatment of high test anxiety in students with deficient study skills.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 49 (6-A), 1374.
Kaplan R. M., McCordick S. M., & Twitchell M. (1979). Is it the cognitive or
the behavioral component which makes cognitive-behavior modification
effective in test anxiety?. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 26, 371-377.
Katz, B. (1978). Treatment of test anxious students by rational emotive therapy,
relaxation placebo and no treatment. Dissertation Abstracts International,
38 (7-A), 4048-4049.
Kirkland, K., & Hollandsworth, J.G. (1979). Test anxiety, study skills, and
academic performance. Journal of College Student Personnel, 20, 431-436.
Kleijn, W.C., Van der Ploeg, H.M., & Topman, R.M. (1994). Cognition, study
habits, test anxiety, and academic performance. Psychological Reports, 75,
1219-1226.
Krohne, H.W. (1977). Angst bei Schülern und Studenten [Anxiety in pupils and
students]. Hamburg, West Germany: Hoffmann & Campe.
Krohne, H.W., & Laux, I. (Eds.). (1982). Achievement, stress and anxiety.
Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
Küpfer, K. (1997). Prüfungsängstlichkeit bei Studenten. Differentielle
Diagnostik und differentielle Intervention. Frankfurt am Main: Lang.
Lay, C.H. (1986). At last, my research article on procrastination. Journal of
Research in Personality, 20, 474-495.
112
Lay, C.H. (1988). The relationship of procrastination and optimism to judgment
of time to complete an essay and anticipation of setbacks. Journal of Social
Behavior and Personality, 3, 201-214.
Lazarus, R.S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York:
Springer.
Leal, L.L., Baxter, E.G., Martin, J., & Marx, R.W. (1981). Cognitive
modification and systematic desensitization with test anxious high school
students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 525-528.
Lent, R.W., & Russell, R.K. (1978). Treatment of test anxiety by cue-controlled
desensitization and study-skills training. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 25, 217-224.
Liebert, R.M., & Morris, L.W. (1967). Cognitive and emotional components of
test anxiety: A distinction and some initial data. Psychological Reports, 20,
975-978.
Lienert, G.A. & Raatz, U. (1998). Testaufbau und Testanalyse. Weinheim:
Beltz.
Lukens, M.D. (1988). Commitment, rational cognition, or skill enhancement?
Comparison of three approaches to the treatment of test anxiety.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 49 (6-B), 2382.
Mandler, G., & Sarason, S.B. (1952). A study of anxiety and learning. Journal
of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 166-173.
McCordick, S.M., Kaplan, R.M., Finn, M.E., & Smith, S.H. (1979). Cognitive
behavior modification and modeling for test anxiety. Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology, 47, 419-420.
McCown, W., Petzel, T., & Rupert, P. (1987). Personality correlates and
behaviors of chronic procrastinators. Personality and Individual
Differences, 11,71-79.
McMillan, J.R. (1974). The effects of desensitization treatment, rational emotive
therapy, and a combination treatment program for test-anxious students
113
with high and moderate levels of generalized anxiety. Dissertation
Abstracts, 34 (12-B), 6217.
Meichenbaum, D.H. (1972). Cognitive modification of test anxious college
students. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 39, 370-380.
Milgram, N.A., Gehrman, T., & Keinan, G. (1992). Procrastination and
emotional upset: A typological model. Personality and Individual
Differences, 13, 1307-1313.
Milgram, N.A., Sroloff, B., & Rosenbaum, M. (1988). The procrastination of
everyday life. Journal of Research in Personality, 22, 197-212.
Minor, T.J. (1982). A comparison of the effectiveness of cognitive therapy and
study skills training in the group treatment of test anxiety. Dissertation
Abstracts International, 42 (7-B), 2996.
Mitchell, K., & Ng, K. (1972). Effects of group counseling and behavior therapy
on the academic achievement of test-anxious students. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 19, 491-497.
Morris, L.W., Harris, E.W., & Rovias, D.S. (1981). Interactive effects of
generalized and situational expectancies on the arousal of cognitive and
emotional components of social anxiety. Journal of Research in
Personality, 15, 302-311.
Nauheim, J.L. (1981). The relative efficacies of anxiety management training,
negative practice and cognitive therapy in the treatment of test anxiety.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 42 (1-B), 384.
Naveh-Benjamin, M. (1991). A comparison of training programs intended for
different types of test-anxious students: Further support for an information-
processing model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 134-139.
2¶1HLO -U +) 6SLHOEHUJHU &' +DQVHQ '1 Effects of state
anxiety and task difficulty on computer-assisted learning. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 60, 343-350.
114
Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Daley, C.E. (1996). The relative contributions of
examination-taking coping strategies and study coping strategies to test
anxiety: A concurrent analysis. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 20,287-
303.
Osarchuk, M.M. (1976). A comparison of a cognitive, a behavior therapy and a
cognitive + behavior therapy treatment of test anxious college students.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 36 (7-B), 3619.
Osterhouse, R.A. (1972). Desensitization and study-skills training as treatment
for two types of test-anxious students. JournalofCounselingPsychology,
19, 301-307.
Plass, J.A., & Hill, K.T. (1986). Children's achievement strategies and test
performance: The role of time pressure, evaluation anxiety, and sex.
Developmental Psychology, 22, 31-36.
Richards, C.S. (1975). Behavior modification of studying through study skills
advice and self-control procedures. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 22,
431-436.
Rorer, L.G. (1983). "Deep" RET: A reformulation of some psychodynamic
explanations of procrastination. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 7, 1-10.
Rost, D.H., & Schermer, F.J. (1987). Auf dem Weg zu einer differentiellen
Diagnostik der Leistungsangst. Psychologische Rundschau, 38,14-36.
Rost, D.H., & Schermer, F.J. (1989). The various facets of test anxiety: A
subcomponent model of test anxiety measurement. In R. Schwartzer, H. M.
van der Ploeg & C.D. Spielberger (Eds.), Advances in test anxiety research,
Vol. 6 (pp. 37-52 ). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger, 37-52.
Rost, D.H., & Schermer, F.J. (1992). "Reactions to Tests" (RTT) and
"Manifestations of Test Anxiety" (DAI-MAN): One and the same concept?
In K. Hagtvet & T. Backer Johnsen (Eds.), Advances in Test Anxiety
Research, Vol. 7 (pp. 114-129). Lisse / Berwyn: Swets & Zeitlinger / Swets
North America.
115
Rost, D.H., & Schermer, F.J. (1997). Differentielles Leistungsangst Inventar
(DAI). Frankfurt: Swets Test Services.
Rost, D.H., & Schermer, F.J. (2001). In D.H. Rost (Hrsg.). Handwörterbuch
Pädagogische Psychologie (S. 405-413). (2., erweiterte und überarbeitete
Auflage). Weinheim: PVU Psychologie Verlags Union.
Rothblum, E.D., Solomon, L.J., & Murakami, J. (1986). Affective, cognitive,
and behavioral differences between high and low procrastinators. Journal
of Counseling Psychology, 33, 387-394.
Sapp, M. (1989). The effects of three treatments for test anxiety: Autosuggestion
therapy combined with study skills counseling, relaxation therapy
combined with study skills counseling, and nondirective therapy.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 49 (11-A), 3313.
Sarason, I.G. (1984). Stress, anxiety, and cognitive interference: Reactions to
tests. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 929-938.
Sarason, I.G. (1986). Test anxiety, worry, and cognitive interference. In R.
Schwarzer (Ed.), Self-related cognition in anxiety and motivation (pp. 19-
35). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sarason, I.G. (1988). Anxiety, self-preoccupation and attention. Anxiety
Research, 1, 38.
Sarason, I.G., & Sarason, B.R. (1990). Test anxiety. In H. Leitenberg (Ed.),
Handbook of social and evaluative anxiety (pp. 475-496). New York:
Plenum Press.
Sarason, I.G., & Spielberger, C.D. (Eds.). (1975). Stress and anxiety (Vol. 2).
Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
Schwarzer, R. (Ed.). (1984). The self in anxiety, stress and depression.
Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Seipp, B. (1991). Anxiety and academic performance: A meta-analysis of
findings. Anxiety Research, 4,27-41.
116
Semb, G., Glick, D.M., & Spencer, R.E. (1979). Student withdrawals and
delayed work patterns in self-paced psychology courses. Teaching of
Psychology, 6,23-25.
Shechter, M., & Zeidner, M. (1990). Anxiety: Towards a decision theoretic
perspective. Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 43,15-
28.
6LHEHU -( 2¶1HLO -U +)., & Tobias, S. (1977). Anxiety, learning and
instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Smith, T.W., Snyder, C.R., & Handelsman, M.M. (1982). On the self-serving
function of an academic wooden leg: Test anxiety as a self-handicapping
strategy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 314-321.
Smithy-Willis, D.L. (1981). A cognitive modification program for the reduction
of test anxiety. Dissertation Abstracts International, 41 (7-A), 3019.
Solomon, L. J., & Rothblum, E. D. (1984). Academic procrastination:
Frequency and cognitive-behavioral correlates. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 31, 504-510.
Spielberger, C.D. (1972). Anxiety as an emotional state. In C. D. Spielberger
(Ed.), Anxiety: Current trends in theory and research, Vol. 1 (pp. 23-49).
New York: Academic Press.
Spielberger, C.D. (1980). Test Anxiety Inventory. Preliminary professional
manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Spielberger, C.D. (Ed.). (1966). Anxiety and behavior. New York: Academic
Press.
Spielberger, C.D., & Vagg, P.R. (1995). Test anxiety: A transactional process
model. In C.D. Spielberger & P.R. Vagg (Eds.). Test anxiety: Theory,
assessment, and treatment (pp. 3-14). Washington, D.C.: Taylor & Francis.
Spielberger, C.D., Anton, W.D., & Bedell, J. (1976). The nature and treatment
of test anxiety. In M. Zucherman & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Emotions and
Spock, B. (1971). Helping the procrastinating child. Redbook, 36,20.
117
Suinn, R.M. (1984). Generalized anxiety disorder. In S. M. Turner (Ed.),
Behavioral theories and treatment of anxiety (pp. 279-320). New York:
Plenum Press.
Tryon, G.S. (1980). The measurement and treatment of test anxiety. Review of
Educational Research, 2, 343-372.
Tuckman, B.W. (1991). The development and concurrent validity of the
procrastination scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 51,
473 -480.
Tuma, A.H., & Master, J. (Eds.). (1985). Anxiety and the anxiety disorders.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Vagg, P.R. (1978). The treatment of test anxiety: A comparison of biofeedback
and cognitive coping strategies. Dissertation Abstracts International, 38
(11-B), 5599.
Van der Ploeg, H.M. (1983). Test anxiety and anger: some empirical
considerations. Advances in test anxiety research, Vol. 2 (pp. 67-80). Lisse,
The Netherlands/Hillsdale, NJ: Swets & Zeitlinger/Erlbaum.
Weigand, S. (2001). Leistungsängstlichkeit und Procrastination bei Stuierenden.
Unveröffentlichte Diplomarbeit, Fachbereich Psychologie, Philipps-
Universität Marburg.
Wells, A. (2001). Cognitive therapy of anxiety disorders. A practice manual and
conceptual guide. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. (1989). Test anxiety in elementary and secondary
school students. Educational Psychologist, 24, 159-183.
Williams, J.P. (1976). Individual differences in achievement test presentation
and evaluation anxiety. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Illinouis at Urbana-Champaign.
Wine, J.D. (1971). Test anxiety and direction of attention. Psychological
Bulletin, 76, 92-104.
118
Wine, J.D. (1980) Cognitive attentional theory of test anxiety. In I. G. Sarason
(ed.). Test anxiety: Theory, research and applications, (pp. 349-385).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wise, E.H., & Haynes, S.N. (1983). Cognitive treatment of test anxiety:
Rational restructuring versus attentional training. Cognitive Therapy and
Research, 7,69-78.
Wittmaier, B. (1972). Test anxiety and study habits. Journal of Educational
Research, 65, 852-854.
Wright, R.M., & Strong, S.R. (1982). Stimulating therapeutic change with
directives: An exploratory study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 29,
199-202.
Zatz, S., & Chassin, L. (1983). Cognitions of test-anxious children. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51, 526-534.
Zeidner, M. (1987). Essay versus multiple choice type classroom exams: The
sWXGHQWV¶SHUVSHFWLYHJournal of Educational Research, 80, 352-358.
Zeidner, M. (1998). Test anxiety: the state of the art. New York and London:
Plenum Press.
Ziesat, H.A., Rosenthal, T.L., & White, G.M. (1978). Behavioral self-control in
treating procrastination of studying. Psychological Reports, 42,59-69.
119
Appendix A
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Program for Test Anxiety
Cognitive behavioral therapy is typically defined as any technique
directed toward modification of irrational or faulty patterns of thinking. When
clients learn to think appropriately, they will be able to cope with their
emotional disorders and achieve more success in their lives.
Treatment of test anxiety through cognitive methods has attracted the
interest of many researchers in the fields of counseling, clinical and educational
psychology. Yet, it is unclear how these methods can be included in a treatment
program to make it effective in reducing anxiety and improving academic
performance in students. This stresses the need to make more efforts in
identifying the activities and techniques relevant to each training session,
because this will facilitate the work of school counselors and have positive
consequences for students.
The present cognitive behavioral therapy program is an attempt to meet
this need. It consists of six sessions, each of these sessions aims to cover certain
points. However, there are general goals of the program that include helping
test-anxious high school students become aware of their anxiety-engendering
self-statements, so that they could replace these statements with rational ones.
Also, the program aims at training them how to focus on the task at hand, and
encouraging them to use any personally generated self-statements that facilitate
their attending to the task and inhibit task-irrelevant thoughts, considering that
VWXGHQWV¶SHUIRUPDQFHPD\EHLPSURYHGE\GLUHFWLQJ WKHLUDWWHQWLRQIXOO\WR WKH
task.
The publications of Ellis (1962), Ellis & Grieger (1977), Beck (1970),
Oliver (1975), Rost & Schermer (1992), Goldfried & Davison (1976), Goldfried,
/LQHKDQ6PLWK'¶$OHOLR0XUUD\'HQGDWR'LHQHU
120
Wine (1971), Zeidner (1998) and Kaplan, McCordick & Twitchell (1979) were
greatly beneficial in preparing the training sessions of this program.
The first session:
The points covered in this session include:
xAsking some Preliminary questions about test anxiety such as:
RWhy do some students get anxious during exams? Presumably, the group
members are all test-anxious, thus it is expected that each of them will
talk about herself concerning this matter.
RWhat are the manifestations or symptoms of test anxiety? The therapist
should make it clear for the group that test anxiety has physiological
manifestations (e.g., rapid heartbeat, sweating, upset stomach, dry
mouth), emotional manifestations (e.g., feeling uncomfortable, feeling of
being defenseless) and cognitive manifestations (e.g., difficulty
concentrating, inability to notice mistakes, worrying about how others are
doing ).
RWhy do test-anxious students perform poorly, compared to their non-
anxious counterparts? Here the therapist should explain to the group that
high test-anxious students divide their attention between task-relevant and
task-irrelevant thoughts, whereas low-test-anxious students focus more on
the task. These task-irrelevant thoughts lead to a lack of concentration on
the task and, as a consequence, impair performance. This will also make
it clear why some students perform poorly on an exam even though they
know the material, and why they Suddenly remember the answers as soon
as they leave the exam room.
xExplaining the goals of the program.
xAsking the group about their expectations towards the program and how
much they are motivated to participate.
121
xOffering examples to illustrate how our feelings can be affected by what we
tell ourselves such as:
Example (1):
Two hypothetical students have seen a snake hidden in the grass. The first
VWXGHQWLVIHHOLQJDIUDLGDQGKHLVUXQQLQJ DZD\+LV WKRXJKWV DUH³WKLVDQLPDO
is danJHURXV,I ,VWD\KHUH LW¶OO DWWDFNDQGELWH PHDQGLWV SRLVRQZLOONLOOPH
7KXV,PXVWUXQDZD\DVTXLFNO\DVSRVVLEOH´7KHVHFRQGVWXGHQWLVFDOPWRWKH
H[WHQWWKDWKHLVFRPLQJDOLWWOHFORVHUWRWKHVQDNH+HPD\VD\WRKLPVHOI³,¶P
not familiar wLWKWKLVDQLPDODQGRQHFDQ¶WDOZD\VVHHLW,WLVQRWGDQJHURXVDQG
LW¶OOQRWDWWDFN PHDVORQJDV, GRQ¶W SURYRNHLW, ZDQW WR FRPHFORVHUWR LW LQ
RUGHUWRHQMR\VHHLQJLW´
Before telling the group members about the hypothetical self-statements
of the two students, the therapist should ask them to interpret the different
emotional reactions of those two students. Why is the first feeling afraid? And
why is the second feeling calm? The therapist should make it clear during the
discussion that those different emotional reactions are due to the different self-
statements.
Example (2):
Two hypothetical individuals are getting ready to attend the same
discussion group. The first person is feeling calm about the prospect, and is
looking forward to the eveninJ DKHDG+HPD\VD\WR KLPVHOI³LW VKRXOGEHDQ
LQWHUHVWLQJ GLVFXVVLRQ WRQLJKW 7KHUH¶OO SUREDEO\ EH VHYHUDO SHRSOH WKHUH WKDW ,
GRQ¶W NQRZ ZKLFK FDQ JLYH PH WKH RSSRUWXQLW\ WR PDNH VRPH QHZ IULHQGV
There'll also be some people there I know and whom I lLNHYHU\PXFKVR,¶OOEH
able to renew some friendships. The second person, by contrast, is nervous and
IHDUIXO +LV WKRXJKWV DUH ³, GRQ¶W NQRZ KRZ ZHOO ,¶OO GR WRQLJKW 7KHUH DUH
JRLQJWR EHPDQ\SHRSOHWKHUH, GRQ¶WNQRZDQG,¶P QRWVXUHLI,¶OOEHDEle to
122
VD\ WKH ULJKW WKLQJ , GRQ¶W ZDQW WR ORRN IR ROLVK HVSHFLDOO\ VLQFH WKHUH ZLOO EH
many people there that I like.
The therapist may ask:
Why do the two individuals have completely different feelings, despite
they will be both in the same situation?
The group members should reach an understanding through these
examples, that when a person is in a particular situation, his anxiety is often not
the result of the situation itself, but rather the way in which he interprets the
situation. In other words, what he tells himself about the situation. This
understanding is very useful as a basis for discussing the negative self-
statements relating to test anxiety in the next sessions.
__________________________
Homework assignment:
The group members are asked to keep a diary of their self-statements,
feelings and behaviors in the situations that they find particularly stressful. They
then discuss these in detail with the group, asking themselves whether or not
their ways of thinking are rational or not. They can then learn to change these
ways of thinking to use more helpful ones.
The second session:
The points covered in this session are:
xExplaining anxiety to the group as resulting from their negative self-
statements (negative internal dialogue) occurring before and during exams.
The therapist can discuss this point with the group members in the following
way:
6XSSRVHWKDW\RXDUHIDFLQJDWHVW<RXIHHODQ[LRXV<RXGRQ¶WFRQFHQWUDWH
on your work. You then say that you are anxious because you are facing a test.
Is that logical? No, because if a test makes you anxious, then everyone of your
123
colleagues must also be anxious and have the same level of anxiety. In fact, a
WHVW VLWXDWLRQ SHU VH GRHVQ¶W PDNH \RX DQ[LRXV RQO\ \RX FDQ PDNH \RXUVHOI
anxious. You make yourself anxious by what you say to yourself.
xExplaining the ABC model of Rational-Emotive Therapy.
The therapist can present this model as follows:
The ABC model is one of the most important techniques in the treatment
of test anxiety. We will use it in this session and the next two sessions in
identifying, disputing the anxiety-producing self-statements.
Test-anxious student says to herself:
A. $FWLYDWLQJHYHQW³,¶PWDNLQJDWHVW´
B. %HOLHIV³,PXVWSDVV,I,IDLO,¶PZRUWKOHVVDQGQRRQHZLOOUHVSHFWPH´
C. &RQVHTXHQFH³,¶PDQ[LRXV´
To make it clearer, the therapist may say:
One can notice that the self-statements mentioned are negative therefore the
consequence is negative. In other words, these self-statements trigger anxiety.
That is why a student is anxious.
The therapist may ask:
Suppose that her self-VWDWHPHQWVDUHSRVLWLYHVXFKDV³,ZLOOGRP\EHVWWR
DQVZHUDOOWKHTXHVWLRQVFRUUHFWO\DQGLI,FDQ¶WWKDWZLOOQRWEHDFDWDVWURSKH
next time, I will prepare myself better and get better scoreV´:KDWGR\RX
expect the consequence will be?
xBeginning to discuss the negative self-statements, which produce test
anxiety.
The therapist can ask the group members to form small groups to test the
validity of each of the self-statements, which he will assign. Each small group is
required to discuss whether the self-statement assigned is positive or negative,
124
and confirms that by offering supporting reasons. If the members of this group
find the self-statement negative, they have to discuss how this negative self-
statement could lead to a consequence such as high-test anxiety. They then
replace it with a positive self-statement. After that, the whole group participates
in a general discussion about the assigned self-statement.
The self-statements assigned for this session are easy to be discussed and
understood by the group members.
Self-statement No.1: 6LQFH,GRQ¶WNQRZWKHDQVZHURIWKHILUVWTXHVWLRQ,ZRQ¶W
NQRZWKHRWKHUVDQG,¶OOIDLO
The group members would challenge and replace this statement with
UDWLRQDOVWDWHPHQWVVXFKDV³MXVWEHFDXVH,GRQ¶WNQRZWKHILUVWTXHVWLRQGRHVQ¶W
PHDQ,GRQ¶WNQRZWKHRWKHUV,ZLOOVNLSWKLVTXHVWLRQDQGFRPHEDFNWRLWODWHU
,ZRQ¶WZDVWHWLPHZRUU\LQJ´
Self-statement No.2: My grades must be higher than my FROOHDJXHV¶JUDGHVLQ
DOOH[DPVRWKHUZLVH,¶OOEHZRUWKOHVV and unlovable.
The group members would dispute and replace this statement with coping
VWDWHPHQWVVXFKDV³,VKRXOGQ¶WFRPSDUHP\VHOIZLWKRWKHUVEHFDXVHHYHU\RQH
has her own abilities, interests and circumstances. Instead, I should compare my
SDVWJUDGHVZLWKP\SUHVHQWRQHVDQGZRUNRQLPSURYLQJP\IXWXUHRQHV´
Self-statement No.3: ,¶PJRLQJWRIDLOWKLVWHVWDQGWKHQHYHU\RQH¶VJRLQJWR
WKLQN,¶PVWXSLG
The group members would rationally reevaluate this statement. Some of
the possible rational self-VWDWHPHQWVDUH³,SUREDEO\ZRQ¶WIDLODQGHYHQLI,GR
125
SHRSOHSUREDEO\ZRQ¶WWKLQN,¶PVWXSLG$QGHYHQLIWKH\GRWKDWGRHVQ¶WPHDQ
WKDW,¶PVWXSLG´
Third session:
The group discusses three other self-statements in this session.
Self-statement No.4: I must pass all exams, and I consider myself a complete
failure for not passing an exam.
Some of the questions that could be raised during the discussion are:
RWhy is it so terrible to have failed an exam?
RWho says I must succeed?
R,I,FDQ¶WSDVVDOOH[DPVGRHVWKDWPHDQWKDW,¶PDZRUWKOHVVSHUVRQ"
The therapist should explain to the group members, that self-worth is
something related to the general behavior of an individual. Consequently, it is
not logical to be measurable in terms of a score on a test.
Self-statement No.5: I must at all times be perfect. I must always get a full
score; I must always be at the head of the class; I must get into the best college.
Anything less than that is viewed by me as failure.
The group members would find this statement negative, because even the
most intelligent students can seldom meet such perfectionistic demands.
Accordingly, a student should do his best to achieve his goals, but this should be
within reason.
126
Self-statement No.6: It is very necessary for me to be loved and approved by all
my family members, friends and acquaintances, and I feel that if I fail, they
ZRQ¶WDFFHSWPH
The questions raised in the discussion are:
RShould others accept me?
RWhat will my parents think of me?
RHow can I face my friends?
It is expected that the students will reach an understanding, that it is desirable to
be loved and approved by some people some of the time. However, it is not
necessary or possible to win the approval of all of the people all of the time.
The fourth session:
Three other self-statements are discussed in this session. Then, questions
about exam outcome are asked, so that the therapist tests to which extent the
group members have profited from the previous sessions.
Self-statement No.7: ,IWKH TXHVWLRQVWKDW,H[SHFWHGDUHQRW RQ WKH H[DP ,¶OO
fail.
The group members would dispute and replace this statement with coping
VWDWHPHQWV VXFK DV ³MXVW EHFDXVH WKH TXHVWLRQV WKDW , H[SHFWHGDUHQRWRnthe
H[DPGRHVQ¶WPHDQ, GRQ¶WNQRZWKHH[DPTXHVWLRQV7KH\PD\EHHDVLHU WKDQ
those, which I expected. I will try to answer them all correctly and I will begin
with those that I know.´
Self-statement N.8: 7KH GXUDWLRQ RI WKH H[DP ZRQ¶W EH VXIILFLHQW Ior me to
DQVZHUDOOWKHVHTXHVWLRQVDQG,¶OOJHWDORZVFRUHRU,PD\IDLO
127
It is expected that this statement will be disputed and replaced with coping
VWDWHPHQWV VXFK DV ³ LI , XVH WKH WLPH HIIHFWLYHO\ LW ZLOO EH VXIILFLHQW , ZLOO
answer quickly the TXHVWLRQVWKDW,NQRZDQG VNLSWKHTXHVWLRQVZKLFK,GRQ¶W
NQRZDQGFRPHEDFNWRWKHPODWHU´
Self-statement N.9: ,I,GRQ¶WJHWDJRRGJUDGHP\SDUHQWVZLOOhit me.
The group members would agree that a student should explain to his
parents that he really does his best to get the highest score he can. Also, he
VKRXOGWU\WRFRQYLQFHWKHPWKDWKH FRXOGQ¶W DFKLHYHRUGRZKDWLVEH\RQGKLV
ability.
After finishing the discussion of negative self-statements, the therapist
may ask: Should a student think about the outcome, or about performing the task
as best as he can, regardless of the outcome? When is it better for a student to
think about the outcome, before, during or after the exam?
The fifth session:
The group members have learned in the previous sessions how to use the
ABC model in identifying and disputing the negative self-statements. In this
session, other techniques for inhibiting task irrelevant thoughts are offered. It is
better that the group members first discuss in small groups the question relating
to each technique. Then, during the general discussion, the therapist can explain
in more detail the assigned technique.
xUsing Positive Self-Talk
%\VD\LQJWRKHUVHOI³,KDYHSUHSDUHGZHOOIRUWKHH[DPDQG,WKLQN, ZLOO
SHUIRUP ZHOO´ D VWXGent can be confident and relaxed during the exam. In
addition, she will not turn her attention to the consequences of failure.
128
The therapist may ask:
If a student is well prepared for the exam, how should he talk to himself on the
exam day?
xConvincing oneself that test score is not a measure of self-worth
The therapist should make it clear for the group members, that everyone
RIWKHPVKRXOGFRQYLQFHKHUVHOIWKDWVKHLVQRWKHUWHVWVFRUH$VWXGHQW¶VVFRUH
reflects just her knowledge of a certain subject on a certain day. If she fails, she
is not a failure. Her failure means that she has a problem. Her problem may be
due to the lack of knowledge, which could be resulting from deficient study
skills and habits (e.g., rote memorization, repetitive reading or devoting
insufficient time to studying), or may be due to negative self-statements (e.g., if
I fail how I can face my parents and colleagues). Accordingly, the student
should seek a specialist (e.g., a counselor) to help her understand her problem,
otherwise the problem will remain or it will probably be bigger.
,VDVWXGHQW¶VVFRUHDPHDVXUHRIKHUZRUWKDVDKXPDQEHLQJ"
xDistinguishing between Demands and Preferences
It should be emphasized that a student will maintain his anxiety, if he
insists that he must pass, must be perfect, must please his parents, or must do as
ZHOODVKLVIULHQGV,ILQVWHDGRI³,PXVW«´KHVD\V³,WZRXOGEHEHWWHUWR«´KH
establishes the precondition for productive work (i.e., for doing his best to get
good scores and directing his attention to the task). The therapist should tell the
group members, that one technique which has been found helpful for a student
to achieve this is to write out reminder cards with appropriate statements on
WKHPVXFKDV³,ZLOOWU\WRGRZHOO³,ZRXOGOLNHWRVXFFHHG³IDLOXUHLVQHLWKHU
DVLQQRUDFULPH³7KHQKHSODFHVWKHVHFDUGVLQVWUDWHJLFSODFHVZKHUHKH ZLOO
frequently see them in the course of the day, and then he repeats these
statements as often as possible.
129
When one student says, ³,PXVWSDVV´DQGDQRWKHUVWXGHQWVD\V³LWZRXOG
EHEHWWHUWRSDVV´LVWKHUHDGLIIHUHQFHEHWZHHQZKDWWKHWZRVWXGHQWVVD\"
xPracticing Thought-Stopping
It is important for a student, especially when he prepares for an exam, to be
aware of intrusive tKRXJKWVVXFKDV³P\ HIIRUWVZLOOEHLQ YDLQ´ RU³,NQRZ ,
FDQ¶W SDVV´ 7KHVH VHOI-defeating negative thoughts can, with practice, be
VWRSSHG +H VKRXOG VD\ ³VWRS´ ZKHQHYHU WKHVH WKRXJKWV LQWUXGH XSRQ KLV
studying, and he should substitute a positive thought, which counters the
QHJDWLYH RQH ³,W LVQRW WHUULEOH WR IDLO RQO\ LQFRQYHQLHQW´ RU³,¶PKXPDQ DQG
IDOOLEOHDPLVWDNHLVQRWDZIXO´
In this regard, the therapist explains to the group members the following
two points:
RIntensive thought-stopping rehearsals prior to a test will not only
minimize the build-up of anxiety, but will teach the student to stop his
task-irrelevant thoughts during a test.
RSometimes when a student is in a test situation, normal thoughts come to
his mind (e.g., about funny situations in which he and his friends were)
and he believes that if he continues to think about that, he will waste his
time and distract his attention. In this case, he can use either the same
WHFKQLTXHPHQWLRQHGDERYHRUVD\³,ZLOOWKLQNDERXWWKDWODWHr, now back
WRWKHWDVN´
Sometimes when a student prepares for an exam, distracting thoughts
HJ ³, NQRZ , FDQ¶W SDVV7KLV LV DZIXO´ VXGGHQO\ FRPH WR KLV PLQG :KDW
should he do to stop such thoughts?
The sixth session:
In this session, the discussion is focused on:
130
xProcedures to attend fully to the task
The therapist should teach the group members how to use and develop
attention-focusing procedures, so that they could control their attention both
prior to and during the test situation. To achieve this:
R+DQGRXWHQWLWOHG³DWWHQWLRQ-IRFXVVLQJSURFHGXUHV´LVJLYHQWRWKHJURXSDW
the beginning of the session. The following procedures are suggested to
be included in the handout:
I will concentrate all energy on the problem at hand.
I will first answer the questions that I know.
I will not let myself get distracted from the test items.
I have plenty of time to complete this exam.
I will read the test questions carefully.
,ZLOOSHUIRUPZHOORQWKLVWHVWEHFDXVH,¶PZHOOSUHSDUHG
I will try not to leave a question without an answer.
I can do well if I stick with it.
RThe group members are asked to form small groups. Each small group
works together to write a list of attention-focusing procedures, reflecting
their own thoughts and words. It is assumed that, with practice, each one
of the group members will develop her own self-instructions just like
what low-test-anxious students do.
xGeneral discussion about the program
One of the main issues on which the therapist should focus is:
The assumption that each member of the group has been qualified to dispute his
anxiety-producing thoughts, and emit alternate thoughts that would facilitate his
attention to the task at hand. At the same time, the therapist should ask the group
members, whether they still have some difficulties in this respect.
131
References
Beck, A. (1970). Cognitive therapy: Nature and relation to behavior therapy.
Behavior Therapy, 1, 184-200.
'¶$OHOLR : $ 0XUUD\ ( - &RJQLWLYH WKHUDS\ IRU WHVW DQ[LHW\
Cognitive Therapy and Research, 5, 299-307.
Dendato, K. M., & Diener, D. (1986). Effectiveness of cognitive/relaxation
therapy and study-skills training in reducing self-reported anxiety and
improving the academic performance of test-anxious students. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 33, 131-135.
Ellis, A. (1962). Reason and emotion in psychotherapy. New York: Lyle Stuart.
Ellis, A., & Greiger, R. (1977). Handbook of rational-emotive therapy.New
York: Springer.
Goldfried, M.R., & Davison, G.C. (1976). Clinical behavior therapy.New
York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Goldfried, M.R., Linehan, M. M., & Smith, J. L. (1978). Reduction of test
anxiety through cognitive restructuring. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 46,32-39.
Kaplan R. M., McCordick S. M., & Twitchell M. (1979). Is it the cognitive or
the behavioral component which makes cognitive-behavior modification
effective in test anxiety?. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 26, 371-377.
Oliver, R. (1975). Overcoming test anxiety. Rational Living, 10,6-12.
Rost, D.H. & Schermer, F.J. (1992). "Reactions to Tests" (RTT) and
"Manifestations of Test Anxiety" (DAI-MAN): One and the same concept?
In K. Hagtvet & T. Backer Johnsen (Eds.), Advances in Test Anxiety
Reserach, Vol. 7 (pp. 114-129). Lisse / Berwyn: Swets & Zeitlinger / Swets
North America.
Wine, j. D. (1971). Test anxiety and direction of attention. Psychological
Bulletin, 76, 92-104.
132
Zeidner, M. (1998). Test anxiety: the state of the art. New York and London:
Plenum Press.
Appendix B
Study Skills Training Program
This counseling program is designed to teach school students the skills
necessary for effective study, and to help them in dealing with the problems they
face while learning. Also, it would be helpful in reducing test anxiety,
considering that test anxiety is probably a natural reaction resulting from
ineffective study methods.
The most important study skills for a school student are covered in six
training sessions. The first two sessions are devoted to teach the group members
how to use the SQ3R method of studying. The third session covers techniques of
time management. During the fourth session, a method of note-taking is
presented. The fifth session is devoted to teach them how to prepare for exams.
Finally, in the sixth session test taking techniques are covered.
+DQGRXWV HQWLWOHG ³HIIHFWLYH VWXG\ PHWKRGV´ ³WLPH PDQDJHPHQW
WHFKQLTXHV´ ³KRZ WR WDNH QRWHV´ ³KRZ WR SUHSDUH IRU H[DPV´ ³KRZ WR WDNH
H[DPV´ DUH JLYHQ WR HDFK PHPEHU LQ RUGHU WR UHPHPEHU DQG SUDFWLFH ZKLOH
studying in the school library, at home or anywhere else, the different techniques
that he will learn during the sessions. The methods and techniques used in the
training sessions are based on the works of Robinson (1970), Morgen and Deese
(1969).
The first session:
This session focuses on the following points:
133
xExplaining the goals of the program, and giving a general idea about the
contents of each of the training sessions.
xMonitoring study behaviors
The experimenter should teach the group members, to monitor their study
behaviors so as to determine the operant consequences of their study activities.
That is to say, through the sessions they acquire new study methods and they are
required to practice these methods during their study activities. Thus, when each
of them monitors his study behavior, he can determine to which extent his
methods have been improved and identify the problems he has experienced
while learning.
xIntroducing the SQ3R method of studying-survey, question, read, recite, and
review.
The experimenter explains to the group each of the five steps of the SQ3R
method, asserting that they should follow these steps in order:
A student should first survey the chapter by glancing quickly through the
headings, tables and illustrations. Furthermore, he should read the final
summary paragraph if the chapter has one. In doing this, he will get a general
idea of what he is going to study before he studies it in detail.
Then, he should question by turning headings into questions to be answered
while reading. In this way, he identifies information he wants from reading
the passage.
134
After that, he should read actively, focusing on comprehension of the main
ideas of the passage. And he should read everything. That means tables,
graphs, and other illustrations as well as the main text. They are there for a
purpose, not just to make the page attractive or to fill up space.
When discussing this step, the experimenter should shed light on two other
important points:
A student should avoid passive reading; he should read to answer the
question he has asked himself or the questions the author has asked.
A student can use underlining as an effective study method if he waits until
the end of a headed section before marking, thinks about what the important
point is, underlines only the key phrase or phrases, and uses a numbering or
marking system that shows relationships among the points marked.
When a student sees a new heading comes up, he should stop and recite the
material in the section he has just finished. He recites the main points in his
own words in order to fix the main ideas in his memory. Through recitation,
he can make sure that he reads with understanding, he keeps his attention on
KLV WDVN DQG KH FDQ¶W GD\GUHDP EHFDXVH ZKHQ D VWXGHQW WULHV WR UHFDOO
VRPHWKLQJKHFDQ¶W simultaneously think of something else.
The experimenter should emphasize, that immediate self-recitation is much
more efficient than rereading soon after the initial reading.
Finally, a student should review main points, recalling the linkages among
ideas or topics, and concentrating on passages not yet totally understood. It is
noteworthy that he should review periodically to refresh his memory and
assure retention of information. The first time should be immediately after he
135
has studied something (e.g., a chapter) he should go back and review the
important points in it.
After explaining the steps of the SQ3R method, the experimenter
should tell the group members that, with practice, they will use this method
as a study habit. This habit will make every one of them satisfied with his
study behavior, increase his motivation to study and improve his
concentration skill. We can simply understand that by analyzing the study
EHKDYLRU RI D VWXGHQW ZKR UHDGV ZLWKRXW XQGHUVWDQGLQJ 6LQFH KHFDQ¶W
understand what he reads he will not have the desire to continue and will find
something else to think about.
In addition, the experimenter should make it clear for the group members
that if they continue practicing this method, they will be able to read better
and faster through acquiring new reading skills such as, they will read
without moving the lips or vocalizing, they will not read each word one by
one, they will not stop by an unfamiliar word and they will not read all
material at the same rate.
_______________________________
Homework Assignments:
-The group members are required to read at home the five steps of the
SQ3R method and try to practice them while studying.
-Each member is asked to keep a diary of his study activities, and tell the
group leader (the experimenter) in the next sessions, to which extent his
study behavior has been modified, for the sake of helping, if necessary.
The second session:
This session is devoted to the practice of SQ3R method.
136
The experimenter asks the group members to apply what they have
learned in the last session to their textbooks. Specifically, a chapter of a
textbook is specified, and each member tries himself during the training session
to practice the five steps of the method (i.e., survey, question, read, recite and
UHYLHZ 7KH\ DUH UHTXLUHG WR DSSO\ WKH VWHSV RI ³VXUYH\ DQG TXHVWLRQ´ WR WKH
ZKROH FKDSWHU EXW WKH VWHSV RI ³UHDG UHFLWH DQG UHYLHZ´ MXVW WR RQH RU WZR
passages, because of the limited time of the session. Then, they present, in turn,
their application of the method, and there should be feedback to the whole
group.
The third session:
The topic of this session is about time management.
The experimenter explains to the group members the steps necessary for
using time effectively.
xDevelopment of a time schedule
The experimenter should teach the group members that in marking out a time
chart they should write in:
First, the activities of eating, sleeping, class hours, and outside work.
Next, the hours during which each of them expects to study each subject.
7KDWLVKHVKRXOGQ¶WVLPSO\VD\³,ZDQWWRVWXG\IURPWR´EXWKHVKRXOG
VD\³,ZDQWWRVWXG\KLVWRU\IURPWR´DQG³,ZDQWWRVWXG\ (QJOLVK
form 4:45 to 6.
They will normally find that there are still some hours left. These hours are
considered free time.
In assigning definite hours for study and recreation, the group members
should be told to consider certain principles.
-If a student is studying for long periods of time, he should stop for a few
minutes between chapters or between changes of subjects. A period of
137
relaxation allows him to attack the next lesson with renewed energy, and to
organize information in memory.
-It is better that a student studies a subject every day at the same time than to
have occasional long sessions. This daily routine develops habits that
facilitate planning, getting down to work, and concentrating.
-A student should take in consideration not how much he studies but rather
how well he studies with regard to study time.
xHabitual use of time schedule
The experimenter explains to the group that a student should follow the
time schedule until he habitually turns from each activity to the next one.
Gradually, he will do that as a habit. It is a good idea that he places his planned
time schedule where he will often see it (e.g., on the wall of his room).
xApplying work rules
The group members are told that there are rules to be followed regarding
VWXG\ WLPH $ VWXGHQW VKRXOGQ¶W ZDLW XQWLO KH LV LQ D VXLWDEOH PRRG EHIRUH
studying, he should begin studying at his regularly set time; he should try to
ILQLVKDOO KLVZRUNZLWKLQWKHWLPH OLPLWVVHWKH VKRXOGQ¶WZDVWH WLPHWU\LQJWR
decide what to study, he should study first the subject he has scheduled; when he
is at the study table, he should try to go right to work, and force himself to
postpone other activities until later; and finally, he should check himself
whenever he starts to day-dream.
The fourth session:
The topic discussed in this session is about note taking.
The following two points are covered:
138
xThe experimenter explains to the group members the five steps of taking
notes, and then he trains them to practice these steps.
A student should record during the class as many meaningful facts and ideas
as possible in the main column of the notes.
He should reduce these ideas and facts into key words and phrases listed in
the recall column.
Then, he should cover the main column and recite the main facts and ideas to
himself using the cues provided by the recall column.
He should reflect on the material. This means he should think about the
content of the notes and write his own ideas and opinions in a separately
organized summation.
Finally, he should periodically review the notes. Reviewing is necessary to
retain what he has learned. Otherwise, in the course of time he forgets.
xThe experimenter lectures for a few minutes on a certain topic of interest for
students (e.g., free time) and the group members listen and practice the steps
of note taking.
The fifth session:
The topic of this session is about test preparation. The following two
points are discussed:
xTiming of reviews
The experimenter discusses with the group members the following
principles relating to the timing of reviews:
Reviews should be done early to retard forgetting which takes place so
rapidly after learning.
The process of reading and rereading during the same study period is not
very helpful, but doing this rereading several hours later is more effective.
139
The very size of the task of reviewing for a final examination tends to lead to
procrastination.
The lengthy session that occurs just before the examination greatly fatigues
WKHVWXGHQWVRWKDWKHFDQ¶WEHDOHUWWKHQH[WGD\GXULQJWKHWHVW
In order to keep the material fresh in his memory, a student needs to do an
intermediate review between immediate review and review just before the
examination. That means he should periodically review.
xPreparing for final exams
The group members should be informed, that the principles of preparation
for quizzes, also apply to preparation for final exams, but the latter cover the
whole course. Therefore, they should take some points in consideration while
preparing for the final exams. These points are:
Review for a certain course should be divided into blocks of material
assigned to three or four spaced sessions.
The last session before the examination may be well spent in looking over
notes for the whole course.
The few day period before and during final exams should be one in which a
student lives normally.
A student should maintain habits of eating, exercise and sleeping. If he
GRHVQ¶WVOHHSHQRXJKKHZLOOQRWSURGXFHZHOOLQWKHH[DPLQDWLRQ
A student should review the material thoroughly and then relax in the night
before an examination, because it is too late to learn much in preparation.
A student should reread sections only if, after looking at their headings, he
has trouble remembering what they are about. In this way, he can use his
time efficiently.
A student should ask questions, prepare examples for each topic, and discuss
the points with a friend.
140
The sixth session:
The topic of this session is about test taking techniques.
The experimenter explains to the group members, techniques for taking
essay exams and techniques for taking objective exams.
xTechniques for taking essay exams
At the beginning, the experimenter should make it clear that in essay
questions a student should recall topics (e.g., from a chapter). Then, he starts
talking about the techniques related to this type of questions. These techniques
are:
First, a student should note the key word in the question. This will tell him
the limited area to cover in answering the question. There are a lot of key
ZRUGVWKDWFDQEH XVHGLQWKHTXHVWLRQVVXFKDV³OLVW´³LOOXVWUDWH´FRQWUDVW´
,IDTXHVWLRQ DVNVIRUD³OLVW´DVWXGHQWVKRXOGQ¶WZULWHDQHVVD\ZKLFKRQO\
will take up more of his time. Only when the question asks a student to
³GLVFXVV´DWRSLFKHFDQZULWHDQHVVD\WRFRYHUWKDWWRSLF
Second, he should look for further limiting words, so that he will give only
what is called for as his answer. For example, a teacher would further limit
what must be covered in a question about unemployment by referring to the
causes of unemployment, and thus he would not expect a student to cover the
effects of this problem.
When a student is asked to answer an essay question, his answer should be
comprehensive and organized. Most students start writing about the first idea
that comes to mind after reading a question, and then continue with whatever
ideas come to mind next. Consequently, the grader may give a low grade. For
141
example, in the question, which asks about illustrating the causes of
XQHPSOR\PHQW D VWXGHQW VKRXOGQ¶W RQO\ LOOXVWUDWH LQ JUHDW GHWDLO WKH ILUVW
cause and not to give enough attention for the other causes, but he should
illustrate each cause sufficiently and in an organized way.
,QD TXHVWLRQWKDWDVNVIRU³GLVFXVVLRQ´DVWXGHQWVKRXOGQ¶WRQO\OLVWSRLQWV
but he should explain why or how.
Giving illustrations to show full understanding is much appreciated by the
gradeU :KHUHDV WKH JUDGHU UHVHQWV ÄSDGGLQJ³LH WDONLQJ DERXW L UUHOHYDQW
points or repeating points already made in order to fill up space).
A student should take a few minutes at the end of the hour to proofread his
SDSHU$QDFFLGHQWDOO\RPLWWHG³QRW´Rr other important word may affect his
grade.
A student should be sure that the questions and their parts are numbered
correctly.
xTechniques for taking objective exams
The experimenter should explain to the group members, that objective
questions require recognition. Then, he discusses with them the techniques
helpful in taking objective exams. These techniques are:
(YHU\ TXHVWLRQ XVXDOO\ KDV HTXDO ZHLJKW LQ VFRULQJVR D VWXGHQW VKRXOGQ ¶W
hesitate too long on the questions whose answers not immediately come to
mind.
The difficult questions should be checked in the margin and returned to later.
Doing so, a student will insure that all the easy questions on the examination
will be completed.
Later questions may remind the student of the answers to the ones skipped.
142
A student should be sure to go back over the examination to answer
questions that were omitted the first time.
References
Morgan, C.T. & Deese, J. (1969). How to study. New York: McGraw-Hill Book
Company.
Robinson, F.P.(1970). Effective study. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers.
________________________________________________________________
Plan of Study, Classes, and Recreation
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday
7:30
8:00
9:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
12:30
1:00
2:00
3:00
4:00
4:30
5:00
5:30
6:00
6:30
7:00
7:30
8:00
8:30
9:00
9:30
10:00
10:30
11:00
Buy your books fast and straightforward online - at one of world’s
fastest growing online book stores! Environmentally sound due to
Print-on-Demand technologies.
Buy your books online at
www.get-morebooks.com
Kaufen Sie Ihre Bücher schnell und unkompliziert online – auf einer
der am schnellsten wachsenden Buchhandelsplattformen weltweit!
Dank Print-On-Demand umwelt- und ressourcenschonend produzi-
ert.
Bücher schneller online kaufen
www.morebooks.de
VDM Verlagsservicegesellschaft mbH
Heinrich-Böcking-Str. 6-8 Telefon: +49 681 3720 174 info@vdm-vsg.de
D - 66121 Saarbrücken Telefax: +49 681 3720 1749 www.vdm-vsg.de
