test anxiety and the gre general test - ets home · pdf filetest anxiety and the gre general...

TEST ANXIETY AND THE GRE GENERAL TEST

Donald E. Powers

GRE Board Professional Report No. 83-17P ETS Research Report 86-45

December 1986

This report presents the findings of a research project funded by and carried out under the auspices of the Graduate Record Examinations Board.

Test Anxiety and the GRE General Test

Donald E. Powers

GRE Board Professional Report No. 83-17P

December I.986

Copyright @ 1986 by Educational Testing Service. All rights reserved.

Acknowledgments

The author wishes to thank the members of the GRE Research Committee for helpful suggestions; Inge Novatkoski for programming the analyses; Ruth Ekstrom, Winton Manning, Craig Mills, Lawrence Stricker, and Spencer Swinton for helpful reviews of the report.

Abstract

survey was designed and administered to a large, stratified sample of GRE test takers in order to:

(a) provide baseline data regarding the prevalence and severity of test anxiety among GRE test takers

(b) determine the relationship of self-reported test anxiety to GRE test performance and to examinees’ knowledge/perceptions of selected aspects of GRE test taking and graduate admissions, and

(c) obtain GRE test takers’ assessments of the contribution of various factors to test anxiety, as well as suggestions for minimizing test anxiety.

The survey instrument included a test anxiety inventory as well as other questions seeking information about examinees’ perceptions of various aspects of GRE test taking and graduate admissions. Minority test takers in each of seven ethnic or racial categories were oversampled.

A significant proportion of GRE test takers report that they experience at least a moderate degree of test anxiety, and some report relatively severe anxiety. On average, however, GRE examinees do not appear to be substantially more anxious about GRE test taking than about a number of other evaluative situations.

Two aspects of test anxiety--worry, i.e., cognitive concern over test performance, and emotionality, i.e., reports of physiological reactions-were found to be very strongly related, but distinguishable by virtue of their different patterns of correlations with other variables, including GRE General Test scores. Examinee self-reports of both worry and emotionality were moderately related to test performance on each section of the GRE General Test, with higher anxiety associated with lower test performance. (These relationships were essentially identical for each ethnic or racial group considered.) Worry was more strongly related than emotionality to test performance, and, when they were considered together, only worry remained highly related to test performance. Although the relationship is clear, these results do not establish a direction of causality, i.e., whether anxiety impairs test performance, whether poor test performance increases anxiety, or whether both test anxiety and test performance are affected by some other factors. Nor do the results establish the levels at which test anxiety may facilitate rather than debilitate test taking.

Examinees' knowledge of certain aspects of GRE test taking (e.g., how to cancel test scores) and their perceptions of graduate schools (e-g., their reliance on GRE scores in admission decisions) showed slight correlations with test anxiety. Examinees also perceived a number of other factors as contributing to test anxiety. These included, for example, the pressures of a timed test and the attitudes of test administrators. The conclusion was reached that test anxiety is both prevalent enough and severe enough among GRE test takers to warrant the continuing attention of the GRE Program. Anumberof suggestions were made for further research, which would involve determining whether or not some of the correlates of test anxiety that were identified may also be causes.

ii

Test Anxiety and the GRE General Test

Test anxiety is one of the most frequently studied constructs in educational and psychological measurement, competing only with test bias for top billing as the “villain in the melodrama of standardized testing” (Anderson & Sauser, 1977). Wildemuth (1977), for example, annotated more than 200 studies of test anxiety that were conducted from 1970 to 1977, and listed a comparable number of investigations that were completed before 1970. Reviews by Anderson and Sauser (1977) and by Tryon (1980) have covered both the measurement and treatment of anxiety, and Sarason (1980) has devoted a complete book to various aspects of the topic. Perhaps the most striking indication of the continued interest in test anxiety, however, is the establishment in 1980 of the Society for Test Anxiety Research (STAR), which held its first international conference in December 1980 (Schwarzer, Vander Rloeg, and Spielberger, 1982).

As might be expected, a good deal has been learned from all of this interest in test anxiety, some of which has implications for helping test-anxious examinees. Among the results are such findings as these:

(a) highly test anxious individuals are likely to have a “negative self-preoccupation” that is readily elicited in evaluative situations (Wine, 1980, p. 371)

(b) the negative effects of test anxiety probably result more from ineffective cognitive strategies than from affective/physiological reactions (Dusek, 1980)

(c) the attention of highly anxious test takers is often directed away from the test, resulting in a lower proportion of time and energy being devoted to the task (Sarason, 1960). In contrast, low test-anxious individuals are more likely to be concerned with the demands of the test situation and with ways of meeting these demands (Wine, 1980)

(d) with respect to the treatment of test anxiety, the evidence suggests that cognitively based strategies (e.g., giving attention-directing instructions) are more effective than emotionality-based techniques (such as desensitization and biofeedback) in reducing anxiety and in facilitating cognitive performance (Deffenbacher, 1980; Wine, 1980)

Yet, with all the interest in test anxiety, relatively little effort has been directed to understanding the role that test anxiety plays in standardized admission testing, especially at the advanced levels of higher education, where differences in (a) the population of examinees, (b) the content and format of the exam, and (c) the importance of the test to examinees may moderate the conclusions of research. Most test anxiety research has focused on intelligence

-L-

IQ tests. A few studies (e.g., Alpert & Haber, 1960; Sarason, 1957; and Sarason & Mandler, 1952) have examined the relationship of test anxiety to Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores. In an especially carefully designed study, French (1962) administered sections of the SAT under both standard and “relaxed” conditions, finding small and inconsistent effects of test anxiety on SAT performance by sex and by test section.

At the graduate level, apparently even less research has been conducted on test anxiety. Deffenbacher (1977) studied the performance of students taking the Miller Analogies Test (MAT), which is used in graduate admissions, and found (unexpectedly) that this test generated less anxiety than did college classroom tests. There does not seem to have been any formal study of the GRE tests.

Accordingly, the major objectives of the study were to:

(a)

W

w

provide baseline data regarding the prevalence and severity of test anxiety among GRE General Test takers and among several subgroups of examinees

determine the relationship of test anxiety to test performance and to examinees’ knowledge and perceptions of selected aspects of GRE test taking and

obtain GRE test takers’ assessments various factors to test anxiety, as suggestions for minimizing the test

and graduate admissions,

of the contribution of well as their anxiety they may

experience when taking the GRE General Test.

Method

Instruments

Test anxiety. Several of the more widely used measures of test anxiety were reviewed for their suitability for this study. Appropriateness for graduate level students, ease of administration, reliability and validity, and ease of adaptation were the primary selection criteria. The measures included the Test Anxiety Scale (Sarason, 1978), the Achievement Anxiety Scale (Alpert & Haber, 1960), the Test Anxiety Questionnaire (Mandler & Sarason, 1952), the Suinn Test Anxiety Behavior Scale (Suinn, 1969), and several others that, upon preliminary inspection, seemed far less suitable. Al though none of the measures was judged entirely appropriate, one instrument, the Test Anxiety Inventory (TAI) (Spielberger, 1980), came closer than others to meeting the requirements of the study.

-3-

The TAI, an abbreviated version of the much-studied Test Anxiety Scale, has itself been well researched. Reported test-retest reliabilities range from .62 to .81, and internal consistency reliability estimates are in the .9Os. Moreover, its correlations with a variety of aptitude, achievement, and personality measures have been reported, and some normative data are available for several groups of examinees, including college undergraduates. with respect to validity, Spielberger (1980) has reported that correlations of the TAI with six other anxiety measures range from 54 to .86 for males and from .34 to .85 for females. Finally, the instrument could be adapted relatively easily for GRE examinees, and it could be self-administered in about 10 minutes.

Accordingly, the 'IIAI was modified (with the permission of the publisher, Consulting Psychologist Press) along the following lines. Individual items were reworded so as to refer specifically to the GRE General Test instead of to unspecified tests. As an example, the item "I feel unsure and tense while taking tests" was changed to "1 felt unsure and tense while taking the GRE General Test." This modification is consistent with the directions for administration that are given in the technical manual (Spielberger, 1980). The change in tense also necessitated a revision of the response scale--from a four-point frequency scale ("almost never," "sometimes," "often," and "almost always") to a five-point agreement scale ("strongly agree, "agree, ” "neither agree nor disagree," "disagree," and "strongly disagree"). Because of these changes, any comparisons between results based on the original 'IIAI and those based on the revisions used here should be made with caution.

This modified 20-item inventory was included as the first section of a longer questionnaire. Responses to the 20 items were clustered according to the TAI manual to yield scores for a worry scale (8 items), an emotionality scale (8 items), and a total scale (20 items). The scoring of each item was on a five-point basis, with "strongly agree" = 5, . . . . "strongly disagree" = 1.

General anxie Additional questions were included on the questionnaire in 0 r to assess the degree of examinees' anxiety in other evaluative situations, such as speaking before a small audience, going to a dentist, preparing for a difficult end-of-semester examination, and competing in a contest or athletic event. These items were developed on the basis of Stattin and Magnusson's (1983) situational-outcome model of anxiety, which emphasizes the nature of expected outcomes in several classes of anxiety-provoking situations, such as social embarrassment, personal inadequacy, physical pain, and rejection. The responses to these six items were summed to provide a "general anxiety" scale. Another item, "taking a graduate school admissions test like the GRE," was embedded in this set of questions but not included in the scale.

-4-

Nervousness. Several other questions asked test takers to rate their “nervousness” at each of several times in the GRE test-taking process, from “registering to take the test” to “waiting for your test scores. ” These questions were intended to provide some information about anxiety levels at various stages of test taking, recognizing that test anxiety is probably not confined only to the time in which the test is administered. (The term “nervousness” was used only as a more colloquial expression for “anxiety” and was not therefore intended to represent a separate concept.)

Knowledge/opinions of the GRE and graduate admissions. Other questions were included to assess examinees’ knowledge of various aspects of GRE test taking, e.g., score cancellation procedures and difficulty level of test items, and graduate admissions, e.g., the importance placed on various preadmission measures, including GRE scores, and the selectivity of graduate schools. These questions were included to determine if examinees’ knowledge and perceptions of these factors might relate to their anxiety levels. For example, beliefs that test questions are relatively easy for most GRE test takers, or that few examinees experience difficulty in completing the test might increase the anxiety of some test takers, especially those who think they are among a minority of examinees encountering these problems. (With respect to test speededness, for example, when Mandler and Sarason (1952) told test takers that everyone was expected to finish a test, a detrimental effect was noted for highly anxious examinees, but a beneficial effect for low-anxious test takers.)

Comments and suggestions. An open-ended question was also I . included to obtain (a) examlnees’ impressions of any other factors

that may have contributed to test anxiety during their GRE test-taking experience and (b) suggestions on how GRE test taking might be modified to generate less anxiety.

Data Collection

Sample selection. A sample of 3,800 cases was drawn from the approximately 66 000 persons who registered to take the GRE General Test in December’1984. Registrants were first stratified according to the following self-descriptions that are provided upon registering for the test: (1) American Indian, Eskimo, or Aleut, (2) Black or Afro-American, (3) Mexican American or Chicano, (4) Oriental or Asian American, (5) Puerto Rican, (6) Other Hispanic or Latin American, (7) White, (8) Other, and (9) Noncitizen. Because a relatively substantial proportion of GRE test registrants did not indicate their ethnicity, an additional sample was drawn from those who did not reveal their ethnic backgrounds or citizenship status. A total of 2,000 White registrants (about 1 in 17) and equal-sized samples of 200 from each of the other subgroups were drawn. The sampling fractions ranged from nearly every American Indian to 1 in 19 noncitizens and 1 in 70 nonrespondents. For data analysis, a subsample of the 2,000 white examinees was also drawn so as to match as closely as possible

-5-

the total verbal, quantitative, and analytical scores of Black examinees. This was accomplished by segmenting the distribution of total scores for Blacks and Whites into 30-point intervals and drawing from the White sample a smaller subsample that approximated the distribution for Black test takers. This matching was intended as a partial control for differences in test score levels among the various subgroups.

mti~hyugvey. A questionnaire (see Appendix) was mailed to each e sample so that it would arrive almost immediately after

the actual test administration. This procedure was used to increase the chances that the test-taking experience would still be fresh in the minds of respondents. Care was taken, however, to ensure that examinees did not receive questionnaires before they took the test, since questions about test anxiety might distract test takers and heighten nervousness. Test takers were asked to complete and return the questionnaire before they received test scores so that knowledge of their actual scores would not influence their responses. As a check, examinees were asked to indicate the date on which they completed the questionnaire. Approximately two weeks after the initial mailing, a postcard reminder was sent to each nonrespondent, and about two weeks later a second questionnaire was sent to all remaining nonrespondents.

Student meetings. As a separate component of the research, researchers attended two GRE Service Committee sponsored student meetings in Tampa, Florida, and Phoenix, Arizona. Time was allotted on the agenda to discuss test anxiety with students who had previously taken the GFIE General Test. The discussion was organized around the categories of information included in the questionnaire. Faculty and other institutional personnel at undergraduate institutions in the Tampa and Phoenix areas were asked to recruit students who had experienced a relatively high degree of test anxiety when taking the test. However, these students were not, in all likelihood, representative of all GRE test takers. Thus, their responses served mainly to provide additional insights into the problems of test- anxious examinees.

Data Analysis

Descriptive statistics were produced for each subgroup for each anxiety scale and for individual questionnaire responses. Intercorrelations among the various anxiety scales were computed, as were the correlations between anxiety scales and test performance. Anxiety scale scores were also regressed on responses to individual questions about the GRE and graduate admissions. These regressions were computed both before and after partialling out both "general anxiety" and ability level (as indicated by GRE scores).

-6-

Interaction effects (between anxiety level and subgroup membership) were assessed by including appropriate product variables in the regression analyses to reveal any subgroup differences with respect to the relationship of test anxiety to test performance. In addition, a polynomial fit was computed to assess any nonlinearity in the relationship between test anxiety and GRE test performance.

Finally, 10% samples of both the most anxious and the least anxious respondents, as determined from their scores on the ‘IIAI tot scale, were drawn. The open-ended responses of both of these sampl of examinees were read and classified in the hope that each group might provide a somewhat different perspective,-wi th one group - bette r able to suggest troublesome aspects of test . taking and the other better able, possibly, to suggest effective strategies for managing test anxiety.

Results

The Sample

:a1 .es

Of the 3,800 test registrants in the initial sample, a total of 3,020 (79.4%) actually took the test on December 8, 1984, and received test scores. (The relatively large proportion of registrants who did not actually take the test is typical of GRE test takers.) A total of 2,710 (89.7%) of those who took the test returned usable questionnaires, and virtually all test takers responded before they had received their test scores. This very high response rate suggests that, in all likelihood, the survey estimates reflect relatively little nonresponse bias.

Descriptive Statistics

Reliability of measures. Internal consistency estimates (coefficient alpha) were quite high for each of the anxiety scales. The modifications of the TAI scales yielded reliabilities of .91, .89, and .95 for the worry, emotionality, and total anxiety scales, respectively. The six-item general anxiety scale was less reliable (.65), probably because of the heterogeneity among the evaluative situations included in the scale. The nervousness scale, on the other hand, which referred only to different stages of GRE test taking, was also very reliable (.89).

Anxiety scale and test score statistics. Table 1 displays the I I means and standard deviations by subgroup for each anxiety scale and

for each section of the GRE General Test. Analyses of variance (with the matched White sample excluded) revealed significant differences among subgroups on each of the anxiety scales and on each section of the GRE General Test. Except on the nervousness scale, for which differences among subgroups were significant at the .Ol level [F(9,2653) = 2.691, all other differences among subgroups were significant at the .OOl level.

Table 1

Anxiety Scale and Test Score Statistics by Subgroups

Subgroup

Scale Test Score

N Emotionality Worry Total General Anxiety Nervousness GRE-V GRw CRJ+A M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD

American Indian 129

Black 136

Mexican American 139

Asian 151

Puerto Rican 136

Other Hispanic 131

White 1460

Other 137

Unknown 108

Noncitizens 144

Matched White 119

23.0 7.6

23.4 7.4

23.1 7.2

21.4 6.9

23.5 6.8

22.1 7.2

21.3 7.2

21.2 7.5

22.4 6.5

22.3 6.9

25.1 7.1

22.0 7.8 56.2 18.1 16.3 4.1 18.5 6.3 471.3 108.5 495.6 127.9 490.2 117.6

23.5 7.7 58.5 17.9 16.3 4.3 18.7 5.7 372.8 101.4 390.5 116.3 401.2 115.7

22.4 8.1 56.9 18.2 15.2 3.9 18.1 5.7 463.0 98.8 449.6 130.5 471.5 117.8

20.2 7.0 52.1 16.4 16.5 4.2 16.5 5.7 481.3 120.9 599.8 127.0 540.7 122.9

23.2 7.8 58.0 16.8 15.3 3.8 17.9 5.6 397.2 100.8 426.9 138.8 410.0 128.0

21.2 8.0 54.0 17.7 15.6 4.1 17.4 5.6 478.5 104.5 490.2 129.2 489.1 131.1

19.6 7.5 51.2 17.3 16.4 3.7 17.1 5.5 520.9 108.4 548.3 126.8 562.4 117.2

20.3 8.3 51.8 18.6 16.0 3.9 17.1 5.5 541.4 117.6 542.5 137.4 562.2 127.8

20.6 7.2 54.0 16.0 16.2 3.6 17.8 5.1 500.6 142.9 518.3 137.3 500.4 128.6

21.3 7.4 54.7 17.2 15.9 3.9 17.3 5.6 394.3 113.8 571.4 138.3 463.3 123.7

25.3 7.7 63.2 17.4 16.7 3.8 20.4 5.4 404.6 74.4 400.8 115.3 405.2 99.0

4%

Table 1 shows a greater disparity among subgroups with respect to test scores than anxiety scales. Using extreme groups, for example, the mean GRE analytical score of White examinees was about 1.38 standard deviation (SD) units above the mean of Black examinees. In contrast, the mean difference on the total anxiety scale between Black examinees and White examinees (again the extreme groups) was .42 SD units. Also, greater between-group disparities were noted on the worry scale than on the emotionality scale, with Blacks and Whites, for example, separated by .52 SD units on the former and only .29 on the latter. The subsample of White test takers, selected on the basis of the similarity of their test scores to those of Black test takers, reported higher degrees of test anxiety than any other group.

Individual anxiety scale items. Responses to individual items on the various anxiety scales may provide a better indication than total scales of the degree of test -anxiety among GRE test takers. Table 2 shows the extent to which GRE examinees agreed (or strongly agreed) and the extent to which they disagreed (or strongly disagreed) with each of the statements on the modified Test Anxiety Inventory. As is apparent, the GRR General Test is a source of some concern to significant percentages of examinees. For instance, 41.8% of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that they "felt unsure and tense while taking the GRE General Test" (37.6% disagreed or strongly disagreed). More than a third (35.6%) agreed or strongly agreed that "thoughts of doing poorly interfered with concentration on the test" (46.3% disagreed or strongly disagreed), and 12.4% experienced even more serious difficulty, believing that they "froze up on the test" (69.2% disagreed or strongly disagreed).

Table 3 shows examinee ratings of nervousness in each of seven evaluative situations, including taking the GRE General Test. As is apparent, examinees indicated some anxiety in each situation. On average, however, respondents reported only very slightly more nervousness while taking the GRE (mean = 3.05 on the l-5 scale) than while preparing for a difficult end-of-semester exam (m = 3.00), competing in a contest or athletic event (m = 2.96), or being interviewed for a job or admission to graduate school (m = 2.95). About a third (33.5%) of all respondents reported relatively extreme nervousness (5 or 4 on the 5-point scale) when taking the GRE General Test, and nearly as many (29.9%) reported the same degree of nervousness preparing for a difficult end-of-semester examination, or competing in a contest or athletic event (29.7%).

With respect to particular time periods associated with taking the GRE General Test (see Table 4), on average, examinees reported little nervousness when registering for the test (m = 1.55),- considerably more immediately before the test (m = 2.97), and nearly as much while actually taking the verbal (m = 2.80) and quantitative (m = 2.71) sections of the test. The analytical portion of the exam generated slightly more anxiety (m = 3.00)-than did either the verbal or quantitative sections of the test. According to examinee reports,

-9-

Table 2

Examinees' Agreement with Statements on the Test Anxiety Scale

Percentage who:

Statement Agreed or Disagreed or

Strongly agreed Strongly disagreed Mean SD

Emotionality

While taking the test I had an uneasy, upset feeling.

I felt very jittery when taking the test.

Even when I'm well prepared for a test like the GRE, I feel very nervous about it.

I'll start feeling uneasy just before getting my test scores back.

During the test I felt very tense.

I felt very panicky when I took the test.

I worried a great deal before taking the GRE.

I felt my heart beating very fast during the test.

Worry

Thinking about the scores I'd get interfered with my work on the test. 30.7 50.3

I froze up on the test. 12.4 69.2

During the test I found myself thinking about whether I'll get into graduate school. 40.5 47.7 2.84 1.42

The harder I worked at taking the test, the more confused I got. 23.1 55.4 2.53 1.16

29.1 49.5 2.70 1.16

27.7 49.6 2.66 1.14

42.4 38.3 3.01 1.23

42.0 39.5

34.9 42.9

16.0 65.0

42.0 39.6

15.2 65.3

3.00 1.30

2.88 1.19

2.27 1.09

3.03 1.32

2.24 1.08

2.69 1.26

2.10 1.08

-lO-

Table 2 (continued)

Percentage who:



(continued) Worry

Thoughts of doing poorly interfered with my concentration on the test.

I seem to defeat myself while working on tests like the GRE.

During the test I found myself thinking about the consequences of failing.

During the test I got so nervous that I forgot facts I really knew.

Other

I felt unsure and tense while taking the GRE General test.

I wish examinations like the GRE did not bother me so much.

During the test I was so tense that my stomach got upset.

After the test was over I tried to stop worrying about it, but I just couldn't.

35.6 46.3 2.81 1.24

21.1 55.6 2.48 1.18

32.8 52.2 2.67 1.31

22.3 60.3 2.42 1.18

41.8

47.0

10.2

19.0 66.2 2.26 1.18

37.6 3.05

25.8 3.33

75.8 1.97

1.17

1.26

1.04

Note: Percentages are based on 2,661-2,673 respondents. Scale included: "strongly agree" = 5, "agree" = 4, "neither agree nor disagree" = 3, "disagree" = 2, and "strongly disagree" = 1.

-ll-

Table 3

Examinees' Nervousness in Several Evaluative Situations

Percentage indicating nervousness:

Situation Nervous* Not Nervous Mean SD

Speaking before a small audience 18.2 40.1 2.70 1.04

Being interviewed for a job or for admission to graduate school 25.7 29.4 2.95 0.96

Taking a driving test for a license

Preparing for a difficult end-of- semester course examination

Going for a dental checkup

Taking a graduate school admissions test (like the GRE)

Competing in a contest or athletic event

15.2 53.2 2.44 1.05

29.9 29.9 3.00 1.02

15.5 67.1 2.14 1.24

33.5 30.6 3.05 1.08

29.7 30.8 2.97 1.04

*

Nervous = percentage of examinees picking either 5 or 4 on the 5-point scale, with 5 = "extremely nervous," 3 = "somewhat nervous,*' and 1 = "not at all nervous.'* Not nervous = percentages choosing either 1 or 2.

-120

Table 4

Examinee Nervousness at Various Times

Percentage indicating nervousness:

Time Nervous* Not Nervous Mean SD

When registering to take the test 4.0 84.5 1.55 0.88

Immediately before taking the test 30.2 69.8 2.97 1.12

During the test Verbal Section Quantitative Section Analytical Section

27.6 41.4 2.80 1.15 26.9 46.1 2.71 1.22 35.8 36.1 3.00 1.23

Immediately after the test 10.8 71.8 1.98 1.10

Now, waiting for your test scores 16.5 59.3 1.16 1.16

*

Nervous = percentage of examinees picking either 5 or 4 on the 5-point scale, with 5 = '*extremely nervous," 3 = "somewhat nervous,*' and 1 = "not at all nervous." Not nervous = percentages choosing either 1 or 2.

-13-

anxiety subsided immediately after the test (m = 1.98) but increased somewhat as examinees waited to receive their test scores (m = 2.33). Thus, test takers were most nervous, generally, immediately before the test and when taking the final, analytical portion of the exam.

Knowledge and perceptions of various test-taking and admissions factors. Table 5 shows the considerable variation with respect to GRE -es’ perceptions of selected aspects of the test-taking process and of the use of GRE scores in graduate admissions. For example, 29.6% agreed or strongly agreed (mistakenly) that “once you’ve taken the GRE, there is no way to keep test scores from becoming part of your test record. ” A total of 49.6% disagreed or strongly disagreed (correctly) with this statement. When asked about score cancellation procedures in a different way, only 52.9% agreed or strongly agreed (correctly) that test scores can be erased from one’s record. Thus, significant numbers of GRE examinees either misunderstand or are unaware of the procedures for canceling test scores. There was also substantial variation in examinee perceptions of the degree to which graduate schools employ minimum cutoff scores on the GRE. A total of 47.7% agreed or strongly agreed that many schools set minimum score levels, below which applicants are not accepted, while 26.6% disagreed or strongly disagreed. With respect to the use of test scores in graduate admissions, 23.0% agreed or strongly agreed that test performance is becoming less important, and 45.9% disagreed or strongly disagreed.

Relationships among Measures

Knowledge/perceptions and anxiety scales. Table 6 shows the correlatrons between each anxietv scale and each of the several examinee perceptions discussed above.* Partial correlations (adjusted for GRE verbal, quantitative, and analytical scores) are also shown. The rationale for also computing partial correlations was that ability level, as reflected by GRE scores, might relate to examinees’ perceptions or knowledge of the various test-related factors, and this might, in turn, account for any relationship between knowledge or perceptions and anxiety. It is possible, however, that because the dependent variable (anxiety) may have affected the covariates (GRE scores), the estimate of the actual relationship between knowledge and anxiety would be biased. Therefore, both adjusted and unadjusted estimates have been provided, with the hope that the true relationship may be somewhere in between.

*It 1s important to note that many of the correlations reported in the following pages are based on individual questions or items, not on scales, which would be more reliable. Thus, the detection of very high correlations is precluded. On the other hand, the very large sample size does provide ample statistical power to detect these relationships.

-14-

Table 5

Examinees' Agreement with Various Statements about the GRE

Percentage who:



If you take the GRE more than once, graduate schools usually consider only your highest score. 43.5 28.5 3.22

Once you've taken the GRE, there is no way to keep test scores from becoming part of your test record. 29.6 49.6 2.66

Many graduate schools set minimum GRE score levels below which virtually no applicants are accepted.

Test scores are becoming less important in graduate admissions.

If you panic or "freeze up" on the GRE, you can have your test score erased from your record.

GRE scores are good indicators of a student's ability to do graduate level work.

47.7 26.6 3.27

23.0 45.9 2.68

52.9 26.1 3.36

12.2 67.6 2.09

1.07

1.22

1.07

1.05

1.21

1.07

Note: Percentages are based on 2,661-2,673 respondents. Scale included: "strongly agree" = 5, "agree" = 4, '*neither agree nor disagree" = 3, "disagree" = 2, and "strongly disagree" = 1.

-15-

Table 6

Correlations between Anxiety Scales and Agreement with Various Statements about the GRE

Correlation with:

Statement Emotionality Worry Total General

. ..Graduate schools consider only highest scores

. ..There's no way to keep GRE scores off your record

Many graduate schools set minimum score levels...

Test scores are becoming less important...

. ..You can have your GRE scores erased from your record

GRE scores are good indicators of ability to do graduate work

06 (-01) 07 (-03) 06 (-02) -01 (-01)

20 (13) 21 ( 13) 21 ( 14) 06 ( 06)

17 (18) 17 ( 19) 18 ( 20) 04 ( 04)

-17 (-17) -15 (-14) -17 (-16) -00 (-01)

-09 (-05)

-17 (-09)

-10 (-04) -10 (-04) -01 (-01)

-21 (-13) -20 (-11) -01 ( 00)

Note: All correlations were based on 2,020 examinees. Numbers in parentheses are partial correlations, controlling for GRE-V, GRE-Q, and GRE-A scores. With a two-tailed test, correlations of .04 are significant at the .05 level; .07 at the .OOl level.

-16-

Table 6 shows a number of statistically significant correlations, though most are relatively small. Rxaminees’ knowledge of score cancellation policies was related significantly to anxiety scales, with less knowledgeable examinees reporting greater anxiety. These relationships were significant even after controlling for GRE scores. For example, holding the opinion that there is no way to prevent test scores from becoming part of one’s permanent record correlated .21 with the total anxiety scale (.14 after controlling for GRE scores).

Test takers’ perceptions of how GRE scores are used in graduate admissions also related significantly to anxiety. Fxaminees who believed that many schools set minimum score levels were more anxious than examinees who did not hold this belief. The correlation of anxiety scales with this belief ranged from .17 to .20 before and after partialling out GRE scores. Test takers who believed that test scores are becoming less important in graduate admissions reported less anxiety than those who did not. Correlations ranged from -.14 to -.17. Finally, test takers who tended to agree that GRE scores are indicative of students’ ability to do graduate level work were less anxious than those who did not (r = -.17 to -.21), even after partialling out GRE scores (r = -.09 to -.13).

Table 7 shows that test anxiety was related significantly to examinee perceptions of the importance of each of several graduate admission factors. Perceptions of the importance of GRE test scores, especially General Test scores, were more strongly related to test anxiety (r = .18 for both emotionality and worry) than was the perceived importance any other factor, both before and after partialling out GRE scores. Perceptions of the importance of college grades, interviews, and faculty recommendations were also related significantly to anxiety, though to a lesser degree (r’s ranged from .06 to .12). When all seven factors were considered simultaneously as predictors of test anxiety, multiple R’s rose to .20 to .22, after partialling out test scores.

The degree of selectivity attributed to graduate schools was indicated by examinees’ estimates of the percentages of applicants who are accepted at (a) their “first choice” graduate school and (b) some graduate school, but not necessarily the first choice. On average, examinees estimated that 43% of GRE test takers are accepted at their preferred school, and that 65% are accepted at some school. As shown in Table 8, each of these estimates was relatedT?jnificantly to test anxiety after partialling out GRR scores (r = -.08 to -.ll). Before partialling, however, estimates of the probability of being accepted by some graduate school were much more highly related to test anxiety (r = -.16 to -.20) than were estimates of the chances of being accepted at a “first choice” school (r = -.04 to -.05). In contrast to the partial correlations, the initial correlations suggest that failing to be accepted by any graduate school may be more anxiety arousing than not getting into one’s preferred school.

_ ._ - _ _ .- _ _ _ -.

-17-

Table 7

Correlations between Anxiety Scales and Perceptions of Importance of Various Admission Factors

Correlation with:

Perception of Importance of: Emotionality Worry Total General

GRE General Test scores

GRE Subject Test scores

Grades in college

Interviews

Recommendations from professors

Extracurricular participation

Academic reputation of college

Multiple R

18 (18)

12 (10)

11 (12)

10 (06)

12 (08) 11 (07)

10 (06) 10 (06)

04 (03)

(21)

18 (18)

15 (12)

09 (10)

11 (06)

06 (05)

(20)

19 (19)

14 (12)

10 (11)

11 (06)

12 (07)

10 (06)

05 (04)

(22)

09 (09)

04 (05)

10 (10)

08 (07)

07 (07)

03 (02)

08 (08)

(14)

Note: All correlations were based on 2,020 examinees. Numbers in parentheses are partial correlations, controlling for GRE-V, GRE-Q, and GRE-A scores. Correlations of .04 are significant at the .05 level; .07 at the .OOl level.

All multiple R's are significant beyond the .OOl level.

-18-

Table 8

Correlations between Anxiety Scales and Various Examinee Estimates

Correlation with:

Estimate of Percentage of Examinees: Emotionality Worry Total General

Accepted at their first- choice graduate school

Accepted at some graduate school

Reaching all but the final question or two on each GRE section

Answering correctly at least 75% of GRE questions

Answering correctly examples of various questions:

Sentence completion

Antonym

Regular math

Regular math

Analytical reasoning

Multiple R

-05 (-10) -04 (-10) -05 (-11) 04 ( 04)

-16 (-08) -20 (-09) -19 (-09) 03 ( 02)

-06 (-03) -06 (-03) -06 (-03) -02 (-03)

-08 (-05) -11 (-07) -10 (-06) 04 ( 03)

_______II_-__--_-___--

-05 (-01) -10 (-05) -08 (-03) 02 ( 01)

01 ( 02) -04 (-02) -02 ( 01) 04 ( 03)

-11 ( 03) -17 (-01) -15 ( 01) -00 ( 02)

-06 ( 00) -09 (-03) -08 (-01) 01 ( 02)

01 ( 02) -01 ( 01) 00 ( 02) 04 ( 02)

( 06) ( 06) ( 06) ( 03)


Multiple R's of approximately .07 are significant at the .05 level.

-19-

On average, respondents estimated that 60% of GRE test takers are able to reach all but the final question or two on each section of the test. There was a slight negative relationship between test anxiety and estimates of the proportion of GRE examinees who are able to complete essentially all of the test in the alloted times (r = -.06 for each scale before partialling out test scores; -.03 after partialling out scores).

A slight but significant relationship was also detected between test anxiety and perceptions of test difficulty, before partialling out GRE scores (r = -.08 to -.ll). The higher the estimate of the percentage of examinees who answered at least 75% of all questions correctly, the lower the test anxiety. This relationship decreased after partialling out GRE scores (r = -.05 to -.07). On average, respondents estimated that 43% of GRE test takers can correctly answer 75% of the questions on the test. This figure overestimates the actual percentage of examinees who are able to answer this many questions correctly.

Examinees were also asked to estimate the percentages of GRE test takers who could correctly answer each of several individual test items, each of which was in actuality answered correctly by about half of all test takers. On average, respondents tended to underestimate the difficulty of three of the five items presented: one sentence completion item (62%) and two regular math items (59% and 63%). On average, the difficulty of an antonym item was estimated quite accurately (51%), and the difficulty of an analytical reasoning item was overestimated slightly (44%).

The perceptions of math item difficulty bore a significant relationship to test anxiety (r = -.ll to -.17 for one item and r = -.06 to -.08 for the other). However, this relationship essentially disappeared after test scores were partialled out, as did the even smaller relationships for the other items.

Test anxiety and test performance. The intercorrelations among GRE test scores and test anxiety scales are shown in Table 9. Very high correlations are apparent between the worry and emotionality subscales of the Test Anxiety Inventory (r = .82) and between each of these subscales and the "nervousness" scale (r = .74 and .80). When a correction for attenuation was applied, the correlation between worry and emotionality rose to .91, suggesting that there is relatively little that is unique to either the emotionality or the worry components of test anxiety as measured here. The "general" anxiety scale, on the other hand, which reflects anxiety in other nontest evaluative situations, bore a significantly lower relationship to each of these test anxiety scales, even after correcting for its lower reliability.

-2O-

Table 9

Intercorrelations among Anxiety Scales and GRE General Test Scores

Variable

Scale or Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 Worry (91) 82 95 18 74 -38 -41 -42

2 Emotionality (89) 95 27 80 -29 -35 -32

3 Total Anxiety (95) 24 81 -35 -40 -39

4 General Anxiety (65) 36 02 -02 05

5 Nervousness (89) -24 -34 -31

6 GRE-V -- 51 68

7 GRE-Q -- 73

8 GRE-A --

Note: Coefficient alpha reliabilities are in the diagonal for anxiety scales. Analyses are based on 2,415 examinees having complete data on these variables. Decimal points are omitted. All correlations greater in absolute value than .06 are significant at the .Ol level for a one-tailed test (.04 at the .05 level).

-21-

The individual items on the general anxiety scale exhibited low correlations generally with both the worry scale (1: = .Ol to .27) and the emotionality scale (r - .08 to .34). The item that correlated highest with each of these scales involved that rating of nervousness associated with preparing for a difficult end-of-semester examination, the only other evaluative situation involving a test used for academic purposes. Gn the other hand, a parallel item asking about nervousness while taking a graduate school admissions test (which was not included in the general anxiety scale) bore a strong relationship to both the worry(r= .67) and the emotionality (r = .77) scales. The correlation of this item with each item on the general anxiety scale ranged from .14 to .42, the latter for preparing for a difficulty end-of-semester examination. The intercorrelations among items on the general anxiety scale ranged from .07 to .47, with a median of .26.

Scores from each section of the test were about equally (negatively) related to each anxiety scale (e.g., from -.38 for GRE-V to -.42 for GRE-A for the worry scale). Scores from each section of the test, however, were more highly associated with the worry scale than with the emotionality scale (e.g., -.38 vs. -.29 for GRE-V). Mean test scores at each level of test anxiety are given in Table 10 and depicted in Figure 1, which suggests a strong linear relationship. The general anxiety scale, although correlated moderately with test anxiety (r = .18 with worry and r = .27 with emotionality), bore no relationship with test performance. (A polynomial regression did not provide a significantly better fit than the linear regression.)

When each GRE score was regressed on both worry and emotionality together, only the worry scale remained strongly (negatively) related to test performance (Table 11). In fact, when the variance common to worry and emotionality was partialled out, emotionality had a slight positive relationship to test peformance for both GRE verbal and GRE analytical performance, and no significant relationship to GRE quantitative performance. For each test section, each additional point on the worry scale was associated with a 7-8 point decrement in test scores. For GRE verbal and GRE analytical scores, emotionality was positively related to test performance after partialling out worry, with each additional point on the emotionality scale being associated with about one higher point on the GRE scale. Thus, worry, and not emotionality, is a better predictor of test performance when both are considered simultaneously. The multiple R did not increase when emotionality was added after worry to the regression equations.

Table 12 shows slight but significant correlations between test anxiety and the tendency to prepare for the GRE General Test by using the practice test that is included in the GRE Bulletin or the other practice tests that are available to all GRE test takers (r = .09 to .16). These correlations were slightly higher when GRE scores were partialled out, ranging from .11 to .18.

-22-

Table 10

Mean GRE General Test Scores by Levels of Worry and Emotionality

Scale GRE-V GRE-Q GRE-A

N M SD M SD M SD

Worry

8-11

12-16

17-21

22-25

26-30

31-35

36-40

Emotionality

8-11

12-16

17-21

22-25

26-30

31-35

36-40

356 560.6 113.7 603.8 124.0 609.2 118.2

472 532.4 115.5 574.7 121.2 573.1 120.9

540 500.2 109.8 539.2 128.0 533.3 120.2

392 471.1 113.5 511.4 132.6 511.0 118.7

383 446.2 107.2 475.0 123.6 475.8 120.5

200 416.4 106.0 429.9 137.9 437.0 117.9

72 418.6 105.1 405.3 120.6 421.5 118.2

225 543.9 114.9 588.1 130.2 592.8 129.1

397 538.0 119.0 585.0 127.7 576.0 128.9

564 503.0 113.6 550.6 127.8 543.3 121.2

461 483.4 109.4 521.4 130.9 518.6 117.7

488 459.8 119.0 476.5 130.8 486.0 128.8

210 440.5 113.8 459.8 131.2 471.8 120.9

67 428.6 106.8 420.9 134.7 439.6 120.7

62(

61t

60t

s9t

sat

57t

56t

St

54

53t

s2t

sit

sot

49t

at

47t

46C

4%

440

43a

420

410

toa

621

611

60(

591

!i6t

57

s6t

sst

64t

53t

52t

51t

600

490

460

470

460

450

440

430

420

410

400

-23-

d GRE-V OGRE-Q 0 GRE-A

12-16 17-21 22-2s 2640 514s 56-40

Worry

E-11 12-16 If-21 22-2s 26-U)

Emotionality

Figure 1. Relationships between Test Anxiety and GRE General Test Scores

-24-

Table 11

Regressions of GRE Scores on Worry and Emotionality

IndeDendent Variable

Dependent Variable Constant Worry Emotionality Multiple R

GRE Verbal b 603.5 - 6.96 1.28 SE 6.51 0.46 0.49 .38 t 92.75 -15.10 2.60 -

GRE Quantitative b 676.6 - 6.83 -0.64 SE 7.36 0.52 0.56 .41 t 91.86 -13.08 -1.15 -

GRE Analytical b 660.4 - 8.12 1.27 SE 6.97 0.49 0.52 .42 t 94.70 -16.42 2.41 -

Note: Analyses are based on 3,018 examinees.

-25~

Table 12

Correlations between Anxiety Scales and Previous Practice on the GRE

Correlation with:

Type of Pracitce Emotionality Worry Total General

Previous GRE 05 (03) 07 (04) 06 (04) -04 (-04)

Practice test in GRE Bulletin 12 (13) 09 (11) 11 (13) -06 (-06)

Other GRE practice tests 16 (18) 09 (12) 13 (16) 01 ( 01)


-26-

Interaction between test anxiety and subgroup membership. To I assess whether or not the relationship be tween test anxiety and test

performance was the same for the various subgroups of examinees, product variables (subgroup x test anxiety) were added to the regressions of test score on subgroup and test anxiety. The resulting increments in the multiple Rs were taken as an indication of interactive effects. This analysis was performed with each test score (GRE-V, GRE-Q, and GRE-A) as a dependent variable, and with the emotionality and worry components of test anxiety, in combination with subgroup membership, as the independent variables. The total anxiety score was also used as an independent variable in one of the regressions. Table 13 shows the results of these analyses. As can be seen, in no instance did the multiple R increase by more than .Ol, and in only one case was this small increase statistically significant (p < .05)--for the worry x subgroup interaction for GRE-V. This small increase of .006 was not, however, practically significant. Thus, the relationship between test performance on each section of the GRE General Test and each of two components of test anxiety is essentially the same for each of the several examinee subgroups considered here.

Suggestions/comments from test takers

Test takers made a variety of comments about factors they perceived to be related to test anxiety, and they offered a number of suggestions for reducing anxiety. Because so many suggestions were made, only a sample of comments was analyzed. These included the comments made by the 10% of respondents who, according to their total anxiety scores, were most anxious, and also those made by the 10% of respondents who were least anxious. It was thought that contrasting these two extreme groups might provide some clues as to additional factors involved in test takers' anxiety.

As might be expected, the "most anxious" sample offered more comments and generally expressed more concern over anxiety than did the least anxious sample. One major variable that distinguished the two groups was their view of the importance of the GRE test in graduate admissions. Nonanxious examinees tended more often to believe that the test is not an important factor in their field or at the particular department to which they were applying. Some were not particularly concerned about whether or not they were admitted to graduate school. Anxious test takers, on the other hand, more often perceived the test as a critical factor in admissions decisions, sometimes perceiving the weight of the test as “awesome” and test scores as “the deciding factor.”

There were differences of opinion among both anxious and nonanxious test takers with respect to the role of the test sponsor in reducing test anxiety. Some believed that anxiety is a "personal thing" with which each test taker must deal individually. Attitudes about test taking were seen as forming at an early age, and therefore difficult to change at the graduate level. As one anxious student

-27-

Table 13

Interactions of Test Anxiety by Subgroups

Dependent Independent Multiple Significance of

Variable Variables R Increase

GRE-V Emotionality, Subgroup Emotionality, Subgroup,

Emotionality x Subgroup

Increase

Worry, Subgroup Worry, Subgroup, Worry x

Subgroup

Increase

Total, Subgroup Total, Subgroup, Total x

Subgroup

Increase

GRE-Q Emotionality, Subgroup Emotionality, Subgroup,

Emotionality x Subgroup

Increase


Subgroup

Increase


Subgroup

Increase

.4729

.4763 F(9,2395) = 1.09, P = n.s.

.0034

.5164

.5225 F(9,2395) = 2.33, p<.o5

.0061

F(9,2395) = 1,41, P = n.s.

.5035

.5083 F(9,2395) = 1.73, P = n.s,

.0048

.4758

.4801

.0043

.5084

.5117

.0033

.5046

.5087

.0041

F(9,2395) = 1.21, P = n.s.

F(9,2395) = 1.48, P = n.s.

-28-

Table 13 (Continued)

Dependent Independent Variable Variables

Multiple Significance of R Increase

GRE-A Emotionality, Subgroup .4882 Emotionality, Subgroup,

Emotionality x Subgroup .4925 F(9,2395) = 1.47, P = n.s.

Increase .0043


Subgroup

Increase

.5359

.5401 F(9,2395) = 1.73

P = n.s. .0042


Subgroup

Increase

.5230

.5270 F(9,2395) = 1.57,

P = n.s. .0040

-29-

stated, “Anxiety is something that can’t be controlled by the testing service” and another, “The problem is out of your hands. Only individuals can deal with their own anxieties.” Another summed up her feelings that there is no way to decrease test anxiety in anxious persons: “I get nervous over the every-three-year written test to renew my driver’s license.” Many students, however, were less pessimistic about the possibility of helping anxious test takers, and offered a variety of suggestions, which are discussed later. Several categories of factors were recurrent themes, and each is discussed below.

Timinq and pacin The timing of the test was one of the most frequently mentioned ctors by both anxious and nonanxious test takers. Numerous examinees commented that the limits were too short, especially for the analytical portion of the test. The “pressures of time, ” the “rigid time constraints, ” and the lack of opportunity to “work at your own pace to show what you know” were frequent complaints. Perhaps this theme was best expressed by one examinee who felt that the pace was so fast that “you never really feel in control. . . ” ; the circumstances are such that “it’s easy to lose your cool. ”

The length of the test was also frequently cited as a factor. Many examinees urged more frequent or longer breaks between test sections as a possible strategy for reducing tension. The possibility of longer breaks between sections was seen as a way to “catch one’s breath, ” “clear heads, ” “collect thoughts, ” “stretch, ” and otherwise relieve tension.

Examinees expressed sometimes conflicting opinions about the best ways to keep test takers apprised of the time remaining in the test. Some examinees urged that a clearly visible clock be provided. One test taker, after having monitored her progress in taking GRE practice tests with a clock, became “extremely nervous” upon discovering that no clock was provided during the test administration. Some examinees found that a proctor’s indicating of the time remaining diverted attention from the test. One examinee relayed that, when the time remaining was posted, he became “intensely aware of the number of questions remaining” and thus had difficulty in concentrating because of heightened anxiety.

There were frequent comments about the amount of time that examinees were required to wait before the test began as a factor that contributed to test anxiety. (In of these instances, the test apparently did not start on time.) One anxious examinee described the “interminable wait” to take the test, the “absolute worst” part of his GRE experience, as being deleterious to his sense of concentration and nervousness.

-3o-

Test administration. The attitudes and competence of test proctors were also frequently cited as factors in test anxiety. On one hand, some proctors were singled out as contributing to anxiety by virtue of their demeanors, being described as “impersonal,” “distant,” “surly, ” “unsure, ‘I “uncooperative, ” “vicious, ” “nasty, ” “condescending, ” and “intimidating. ” Some administrators were criticized because they were “disorganized,” “nervous,” or “unprepared, ” or because they distracted test takers with “endless pacing” and “looking over shoulders. ” Some were perceived as too businesslike (“Our proctor was very serious. He could have ma= things less tense by smiling a little!“) A number of other test takers also alluded to the formality surrounding the testing situation-its “bureaucratic” check-in procedures, formal identification of examinees, and so forth. On the other hand, some of the more satisfied examinees referred to “pleasant” test administrators who “made the atmosphere more relaxed” and to “smiling, ” “friendly” administrators who helped to relieve tension.

A number of comments pertained to test administration facilities. Some examinees were distressed that they were unable to readily locate the test site. Others became anxious upon discovering that the exact location of the the test site had been changed at the last minute. Examinees suggested posting directions at test locations and, if possible, having examinees take the test at their own undergraduate institutions, where they would be more familiar with facilities. Examinees also reported-encountering a variety of uncomfortable conditions at test centers (inappropriate temperatures, inadequate lighting or seating, and other distractions such as a high level of noise) that interfered with concentration.

A number of suggestions were made regarding the scheduling of the test. Several examinees suggested that fellow test takers avoid taking the General Test and the Subject Tests on the same day because of the need to concentrate over such a long period of time and the damage caused by “unrelieved stress. ” Some suggested that, if the test were offered more often, it could be retaken more frequently before admissions deadlines. The particular administration (December) from which we sampled test takers was seen as less than ideal, as it often coincides with another stressful period--preparing for and taking end-of-semester examinations. For one examinee, December 8 (the day of the exam) “fell in the worst part of my semester with numerous papers and tests. ” Several examinees suggested that the test be administered later than 8 A.M. in order to relieve anxiety about being on time.

Test content. Some comments pertained more directly to the test than to its administration. One suggestion was to shorten the test, usually in order to permit more time per question. Among the suggested modifications to the test were (a) to decrease test difficulty, (b) to offer an extra section for each part of the test, thereby enabling ETS to discount the section on which performance is lowest, and (c) to distribute the experimental questions throughout the test, rather than including all of them in a single section.

-31-

With respect to test content specifically, the analytical section appeared to cause somewhat more concern than the other sections of the test. For example, one examinee, who believed he had good analytical skills, was “completely flummoxed” by the analytical section, which increased his anxiety level. Another test taker referred to the “psychological block” she experienced when encountering the analytical questions, and another mentioned the difficulty of judging the time required to answer analytical questions.

Other comments. Numerous miscellaneous, and sometimes I conflicting, comments were made about various other aspects of GRE test taking. For example, one examinee said that talking to former GRE examinees was “the biggest tension relief,” while others suggested that, because poorly performing examinees may exaggerate the difficulty of the test (and thus generate anxiety), a prospective test taker would be best advised not to talk to previous examinees.

With regard to graduate admissions, several examinees suggested the publicatin of the average GRE scores of examinees admitted to various institutions--a strategy that was seen as potentially anxiety reducing, presumably because suitable test scores are lower than test takers may suppose-- and to make absolutely certain that test takers realize that test scores are but one of several factors in graduate admissions.

Some examinees emphasized the importance of test preparation as a way to relieve anxiety. They urged more test preparation, especially by taking practice tests, to instill confidence and reduce anxiety. As one examinee commented, “A systematic method of taking a test tends to dispel anxiety.”

Finally, one examinee suggested a “hot line” for anxious test takers, and numerous others suggested the benefits of relaxation techniques. Possibly the soundest advice of any that was offered was simply to “concentrate only on the test, not on whether youfll pass or get into graduate school.” The comments made in the student meetings reinforced a number of these views.

Summary and Discussion

According to examinee reports, both emotionality, i.e., physiological-affective reactions, and worry, i.e., cognitive concern over test performance, run high for a significant proportion of GRE test takers. Taking the GRE General Test does not, however, seem to generate substantially more anxiety than do a number of other evaluative situations, such as taking an end-of-semester exam or competing in a contest or athletic event.

-32-

The relationship between test anxiety and anxiety experienced in other evaluative situations was found to be relatively modest, suggesting that anxious test takers are not necessarily nervous in other evaluative situations and, conversely, that persons who are uneasy in other evaluative situations are not necessarily anxious about standardized test taking. It has been contended (e.g., Wine, 1980) that test anxious persons typically interpret a wide range of situations as evaluative, and thereby exhibit both cognitive concern and performance deficits. She suggested, therefore, that Rosenberg’s (1965) term “evaluation apprehension” might be a more accurate descriptor than “test anxiety” of the phenomenon associated with test taking. The results of this study suggest, however, that although a general apprehension about evaluation may underlie both test and nontest evaluative situations for GRE test takers, test anxiety appears to be distinguishable from the anxiety that arises in other evaluative settings. This finding suggests that modifying the conditions of test taking, rather than trying to change the more permanent (personality) traits of test takers, holds the greater promise for alleviating test anxiety.

The two aspects of test anxiety--worry and emotionality--that were considered in this study were shown to be very highly related, but, according to their patterns of correlations with other variables, distinguishable from each other. A moderate negative relationship was detected between test performance on each section of the GRE General Test and each of these two aspects of anxiety. Worry was slightly more strongly related than emotionality to test performance, and when considered together, i.e., when the variance in common to both worry and emotionality was controlled, only worry remained strongly related to test performance. This finding is consistent with a number of previous studies (e.g., Morris & Liebert, 1970; Nffenbacher, 1977) and suggests that, as Wine (1980) has contended, the emotional reactivity interpretation of test anxiety, to which many researchers have adhered, may not be the most valid view. Along these lines, Meichenbaum & Butler (1980) concluded that it is not the level of physiological arousal per se that has a debilitating effect on test performance. Rather, it is what test takers’ say to themselves about this reaction that impairs test performance. With respect to treating test anxiety, therefore, the greatest payoff may result from attempts to restructure worrisome thoughts and to redirect attention toward the test rather than from efforts to decrease physiological reactions.

Another useful distinction that has been made in research on test anxiety, but that was not considered explicitly in this study, is the difference between the facilitating and the debilitating aspects of test anxiety (Alpert & Haber, 1960). Related to this distinction is the notion that, in small doses, anxiety may facilitate test performance but that beyond some point its influence is debilitating. Of the two components of test anxiety considered here, worry seems more likely to be debilitating, while, all other things being equal, some emotionality might have an energizing effect on test performance.

-33-

Wine (1971), for example, believes that, as an attention-demanding activity, worry is more debilitating to task performance than is autonomic arousal.

The relationship between test performance and both the worry and the emotionality aspects of test anxiety was essentially the same for each of the several ethnic subgroups considered in this study. This finding extends previous studies of test anxiety, that, having been based on much smaller samples, were unable to examine subgroup differences--at least for as many subgroups as considered here. That the relationship of test anxiety to test performance does not differ across subgroups, and that between-group differences in test performance are much more pronounced than between-group differences in test anxiety, would seem to suggest that differences in test anxiety may play at the most a relatively small role in subgroup test score differences. On the other hand, to the extent that poor test performance contributes to feelings of anxiety, test performance could conceivably explain a substantially greater proportion of the between-group differences in test anxiety.

Although a strong relationship between test anxiety and test performance was detected, the exact nature of this relationship remains uncertain. The data gathered here do not answer whether or not (a) test anxiety affects test performance, (b) test performance affects anxiety level, (c) anxiety and test performance are both affected by some other factors, or (d) the causal relationship between test anxiety and test performance is bidirectional (e.g., Hill, 1972). Until relatively recently, the most frequent assumption has been that test anxiety affects test performance. The more recent conceptualizations of test anxiety have moved away from emotional reactivity formulations toward cognitive-attentional models, and, most recently, toward formulations emphasizing skill or information processing deficits. These more recent views hold that deficiencies in study habits or test-taking skills contribute more to the lower performance of test-anxious examinees than does test anxiety (Paulman & Kennelly, 1984). Test anxiety may be merely a natural reaction resulting from poor test taking skills (Tryon, 1980). That in this study, high- and low-scoring test takers were differentiated more by worry than by emotionality seems consistent with this view.

Compared with the correlations of SAT performance with worry and emotionality reported by Spielberger (1980), the correlations computed in the present study are significantly higher. For one college, Spielberger reported correlations between worry and SAT verbal scores of -.17 for men and -.23 for women, and between worry and SAT mathematical scores of -.19 for men and -.18 for women. In the present study, the correlations between worry and GRE performance ranged from -.38 to -. 42 for the three sections of the GRE General Test. Several hypotheses could be advanced to explain the substantially higher correlations for GRE test takers. One possibility is simply that, because of selection, the range of test

-34-

scores for matriculants at a single college was much more restricted than the range of scores for unselected GRE test takers. Hence, the correlations reported for one college might be expected to be lower than those computed for GRE test takers. Discounting this possibility, another possible explanation is that GRE test takers may have a better idea from previous standardized test taking of their test taking skills and possibly of their expected test scores than do SAT test takers. Taken at face value, then, the higher correlations with GRE scores would seem also to be consistent with the view that deficient test performance may cause test anxiety. (The reader is again reminded that our results are based on examinees’ self reports of test anxiety. The accuracy of such reports may be questioned on the grounds that examinees who perform poorly may rationalize their low performances by reporting high levels of anxiety. Presumably, however, any tendency to exaggerate actual anxiety would be greater for low-scoring examinees than for high-scoring ones. Thus, the actual relationship between test anxiety and test performance would be stronger than estimated here.) In retrospect, the study would have been strengthened by asking examinees to estimate their test performance when they completed the Test Anxiety Inventory, and relating these estimates to reported anxiety levels.

Whether or not test anxiety affects test peformance, however, reducing the discomfort that some highly anxious GRE test takers experience would seem to be a laudable goal, even though test takers themselves differ with respect to their views about whether the GRE Program is able (or should be expected) to help test anxious examinees . Apparently, a significant number of GRE examinees believe that the nature of test anxiety is such that only individual examinees can deal effectively with their own personal anxieties. Researchers generally agree that test anxiety appears early in life, resulting from reactions to early evaluative experiences (Dusek, 1980), or from interaction with parents who set unrealistically high levels of expectation and who focus on failures rather than successes (Sarason, Davidson, Lighthall, Waite, & Ruebush, 1960). There may, therefore, be some validity to the view that any intervention at the graduate level is not likely to be very effective. Nonetheless, the findings of this study point to some avenues that may be worthy of further exploration.

A wide variety of approaches to treating test anxiety have been developed and evaluated. For example, Wine (1980) mentions procedures involving (a) attention-directing or task-orienting manipulations, (b) mental imagery, (c) reassurance instructions, (d) relaxation training, (e) observation of models, (f) desensitization techniques, and (g) self-control strategies. As with most problems, different treatments can be expected to be more beneficial for some people than for others, and, predictably, some people can be expected to benefit more from some treatments than from others. In the test anxiety literature there are even examples of treatments that appear to have beneficial effects for high-anxious test takers and detrimental effects for low-

-35-

anxious test takers. Thus, any strategies aimed at helping as heterogeneous a population as GBE examinees would need to be pursued carefully, lest initially low-anxious test takers become so thoroughly relaxed that they fail to show any concern at all for their test performance!

Allen, Ellias, and Zlotlow (1980) give a succinct summary of the effectiveness of test anxiety treatments--that (a) with respect to reducing self-reported test anxiety, treatment of some kind is better than none, and (b) relaxation and desensitization are clearly useful in reducing subjectively experienced anxiety, but by themselves have little effect on intellectual or academic performance. Allen (1972) also noted that emotionality reduction procedures, while likely to reduce self-reported anxiety, were unlikely to improve cognitive performance. Wine (1980) has stressed the helpfulness of instructions that direct attention away from self-preoccupied worry and provide information about effective problem solving.

Given this general summary of the treatment of test anxiety, what do the results of this study suggest? Several possibilities arise from the various findings. One possibility relates to the pre-examination information that is provided to all prospective GBE test takers in, primarily, the GRE Information Bulletin.- The GRE

I I I examinees in this study exhibited considerable variation with respect to their knowledge and-perceptions of several important aspects of both GEE test taking and graduate admissions. For instance, a relatively large proportion (perhaps about half) of all examinees were either uncertain or mistaken about the opportunity to cancel test scores before they are reported. Also, with respect to graduate admissions, nearly half believed (and only a forth did not believe) that graduate schools employ minimum cutoff scores on the GEE General test. These and certain other perceptions were related modestly to reported test anxiety. Examinees who were unaware of score cancellation procedures were more anxious that those who knew how to cancel test scores. This finding suggests the potential value of placing greater emphasis on examinees’ ability to cancel test scores, if anxiety (or any other factor) should interfere with test performance. Armed with this knowledge, an anxious test taker might be less inclined to perceive the three-hour test as a do-or-die situation. This strategy presumes, of course, that the test taker has taken the exam early enough in the testing year to exercise this option and retake the test.

Information might also be provided regarding the selectivity of graduate schools in various fields. Our data suggest that test takers believe that graduate schools are generally more selective than they actually may be. Test takers’ belief that many graduate schools use minimum test score cutoffs--a practice that clearly violates the guidelines for the proper use of GRE scores--was widespread. This belief was also related to test anxiety levels. In addition, the test takers in our study believed that, on average, about 65% of all GEE

-36-

examinees are admitted to some graduate school. This figure is somewhat lower than the 76% of graduate applicants in Baird’s (1982) study who had received at least one offer of acceptance. Thus, providing information about, for example, the test scores of admitted graduate applicants (as one test taker in our sample suggested) or about the acceptance rates in various graduate fields might, in some cases, modestly reduce test anxiety.

Questions concerning time limits and test speededness are among those most often asked by test takers and test critics. Not suprisingly, the pressure associated with a timed test was one of the sources of test anxiety that was most frequently mentioned in this study. Several research studies (e.g., Wild & Durso, 1979) have shown that relaxing time limits seems to benefit various subgroups of examinees about equally with respect to test performance. However, there has been no such comparison of how anxious and nonanxious test takers might perform under less speeded conditions of test taking. In light of examinee comments, it seems quite possible that, under more relaxed time conditions, the performance of highly anxious test takers might improve disproportionately over that of less anxious examinees.

With respect to treating the anxiety that may result from the pressures of time, one strategy that test takers themselves might follow is to take advantage of the (currently) seven full-length practice tests that are available from the GRE Program, either in the current information bulletin or in Practicing to Take the GRE General Test (1983-84 and 1984-85 editions). Test takers have been advised in progrmsponsored publications to observe in practice the time limits that will be imposed during the actual test administration. With the availability of seven tests, examinees who experience the pressures of time might attempt to desensitize themselves by taking the practice tests under increasingly stringent time conditions, beginning, say, with a completely untimed test and ending with one or more fully timed tests. The extensive practice afforded by this strategy might also instill greater confidence in test-taking skills and help to dispel anxiety.

Examinees frequently mentioned the attitudes and behaviors of GRE test center supervisors and test proctors as playing an important role in moderating the anxiety they experienced. The current edition of the manual for GRE test center supervisors informs test administrators that their good judgment and sensitivity are important to ensuring satisfactory testing conditions- that their attitude and behavior set the tone for the test center. Supervisors are advised to be “cordial but professional” and to begin the testing session with an informal greeting to help ease anxiety. According to examinee comments, however, some test administrators are apparently less successful than others with regard to maintaining this demeanor and consequently, in the eyes of some examinees, have a negative effect on test anxiety.

-37-

Survey respondents also stressed the importance of processing examinees efficiently upon their arrival at test centers so that test takers do not become unnerved by needless waiting, by less-than- organized test administrators, or by unexpected changes in the test taking routine. One examinee suggestion that might be explored is to provide relaxation techniques that examinees could use while waiting for the test to begin, thereby taking advantage of otherwise unproductive (and sometimes counterproductive) "dead time."

The need for the continued careful training of test supervisors and their staffs should be stressed. Such training might include a greater emphasis on the sometimes subtle differences between the perceptions of test administrators and those of test takers--for example, being "professional" vs. "bureaucratic," "walking about the test room quietly" vs. "endless pacing," and "...pausing behind an examinee" vs. "looking over shoulders." Wine (1980) has offered some research-based suggestions for altering the evaluative nature of the school that might also apply to testing. She suggests redefining the role of the teacher, shifting the emphasis from an evaluative to an information-giving function. Judging from their comments, test takers would encourage this sort of shift for some GRE test administrators, and Geen's (1977) research suggests that this change might benefit highly anxious test takers.

Finally, many GRE test takers would apparently welcome slightly longer breaks between sections of the test. An extra minute or so between test sections, while not appreciably increasing the total testing time, could, according to examinee reactions, provide an opportunity to collect one's thoughts (and one's breath), which in turn would facilitate a more relaxed transition to subsequent sections of the test.

Followup activities

This study has identified several correlates of test anxiety in the context of GRE testing and graduate admissions. Most of these variables are ones over which the GRE Program could exert some control to help test anxious examinees. First, however, it would be very desirable to examine these factors more closely in order to determine whether or not they are causally related to test anxiety. Only then can the implications for program policy be stated with any confidence.

To provide the needed information a number of studies might be mounted as follows:

1. Provide extra emphasis on pre-examination score cancellation procedures to a random

experimental

information about sample of GRE test

registrants. This could entail simply providing the section of the GRJ3 Information Bulletin that describes score cancellation procedures, appropriately highlighted or annotated. The anxiety reported by this group could then be compared with that experienced by a control group consisting of another random sample of GRE test takers. Provided that

-38-

these two groups experience different levels of test anxiety, a subsequent comparison of between-group differences in test scores would also help to establish the extent to which test anxiety affects GRE test performance.

2. Provide realistic information about the selectivity of graduate schools to a random sample of GRE test registrants, and compare their anxiety levels and test performance with those of another random sample of noncontacted GRE test registrants. The experimental sample might be selected, for example, on the basis of the graduate fields in which they intend to study or the graduate departments they designate as test score recipients. A number of graduate departments could be recruited as participants, and help to decide what kinds of information might be appropriate to send applicants.

3. Study the effects of speededness on test anxious examinees by administering a test (e.g., an experimental section associated with an operational test form)under both standard and relaxed conditions (i.e., either including fewer test questions or extending time limits). The test anxiety levels of examinees in each condition would be compared, as would their test performance, and the interaction of test anxiety with test timing would be examined.

4. Compare the test performance and test-taking behaviors of anxious examinees on the various sections of the GRE General Test, or possibly on the several types of questions that make up each section. This might be accomplished by using, for example, the “think aloud” procedures that are coming into more widespread use in research on test taking. Because some GRE test sections generated somewhat more anxiety than others, and because the various item types differ with respect to the demands they place on test takers, comparative studies of this sort might hold promise for identifying test content characteristics that relate differentially to test anxiety.

5. Examine the generalizability of the study findings to the GRE Subject Tests. In the current study of the GRE General Test, some examinees alluded to the role that test preparation may play in decreasing anxiety. Others felt that test anxiety ran high for the General Test because there is relatively little that examinees can do to prepare themselves for this test. Unlike the General Test, however, the GRE Subject Tests are designed specifically to reflect previous academic preparation. Thus, the relationship between test performance and test anxiety might be different for the Subject Tests than for the General Test.

A number of other small experimental studies along the same lines could be designed to evaluate the causal status of any of the other correlates of test anxiety that were identified in the study.

-39-

References

Allen, G. J. (1972). The behavioral treatment of test anxiety: Recent research and future trends. Behavior Therapy, 2, 253-262.

Allen, G. J., Elias, M. J., & Zlotlow, S. F. (1980). Behavioral interventions for alleviating test anxiety: A methodological overview of current therapeutic practices. In I. G. Sarason (Ed.), Test anxiety: Theory, research, and applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Alpert, R., & Haber, R. N. (1960). Anxiety in academic achievement situations. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 61, 207-215.

Anderson, S. B., & Sauser, W. I., Jr. (1977, May). Measurement of test anxiety. In Test anxiety revisited. Symposium presented at the meeting of the Southeastern Psychological Association.

Baird, L. L. (1982). An examination of the graduate study application and enrollment decisions of GRE candidates (GREB Research Report No. 79-11R). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Beffenbacher, J. L. (1977). Relationship of worry and emotionality to oerformance on the Miller Analogies Test. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 191-195.

Beffenbacher, J. L. (1980). Worry and emotionality in test anxiety. In I. G. Sarason (Ed.), Test anxiety: Theory, research, and applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Busek, J. B. (1980). The development of test anxiety in children. In I. G. Sarason (Ed.), Test anxiety, Theory, research, and applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

French, J. W. (1962). Effect of anxiety on verbal and mathematical examination scores. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 22, 553-564.

Geen, R. G. (1977). The effects of anticipation of positive and negative outcomes on audience anxiety. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 45, 715-716.

Hill, K. T. (1972). Anxiety in the evaluative context. In W. Hartup (Ed.), The young child (Vol. 2). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

-4o-

Mandler, G., & Sarason, S. B. (1952). A study of anxiety and learning. 166-173.

Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47,

Meichenbaum, D., & Butler, L. (1980). Toward a conceptual model for the treatment of test anxiety: Implications for research and treatment. In I. G. Sarason (Ed.), Test anxiety: Theo research, and applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Associates, Inc.

Morris, L. W., & Liebert, R. M. (1970). Relationship of cognitive and emotional components of test anxiety to physiological arousal and academic performance. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 35, 332-337.

Paulman, R. G., & KeMdly, K. J. (1984). Test anxiety and ineffective test taking: Different names, same construct? Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 279-288.

Rosenberg, M. J. (1965). When dissonance fails: On eliminating evaluation apprehension from attitude measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, A, 28-43.

Sarason, I. G. (1957). Test anxiety, general anxiety, and intellectual performance. 485-490.

Journal of Consulting-Psychology, 21,

Sarason, I . G. (1960). Empirical findings and theoretical problems in the use of anxiety scales. Psychological Bulletin, 57, 403-415.

Sarason, I. G. (1978). The test anxiety scale: concept and research. In C. D. Spielberger & I. (Vol. 5). Washington, DC:

G. Sarason (Eds.), Stress and anxiety Hemisphere Publishing Corp.

Sarason, I. G. (Ed.). (1980). Test anxiety: Theory, research, and applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Sarason, S. B., & Mandler, G. (1952). Some correlates of test anxiety. Journal, 47, 810-817.

Sarason, S. B., Davidson, K. S., Lighthall, F. F., Waite, R. R., & Ruebush, B. K. (1960). Anxiety in elementary school children. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Schwarzer, R., Vander Ploeg, H. M., & Spielberger, C. D. (Eds.). (1982). Advances in test anxiety research (Vol. I). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

-41-

Spielberger, C. D. (1980). Test anxiety inventory. professional manual. Palo Alto, CA: Press.

Stattin, H., & Magnusson, D. (1983). Outcome classes of anxiety-provoking situations. Reports from the Department of Psychology (Number 597). Stockholm: The University of Stockholm.

Suinn, R. (1969). The STABS, a measure of test anxiety for behavior therapy: Normative data. 335-339.

Behaviour Research and Therapy, 1,

Tryon, G. S. (1980). The measurement of treatment of test anxiety. Review of Educational Research, 50, 343-372. -

Wild, C. L., & Durso, R. (1979). Effect of increased test-taking time on test scores by ethnic group, age, and sex (GREB Research Report No. 76-6R). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Wildemuth, B. M. (1977). Test anxiety: An extensive bibliography (ERIC/TM Report 64). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Wine, J. (1971). Test anxiety and direction of attention. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 92-104. -

Wine, J. D. (1980). Cognitive-attentional theory of test anxiety. In I. G. Sarason (Ed.), Test anxiety: Theory, research, and aonlications. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

APPENDIX

609-921-9000

CABLE-EDUCTESTSVC

.

DIVISION OF MEASUREMENT

RESEARCH AND SERVICES

December 1984

Dear GRE Test Taker:

We are writing to you because you registered to take the GRE General (morning) test on December 8. We are seeking your help to determine how much anxiety test takers encounter when they take the GRE. Our eventual goal is to find ways to decrease the nervousness that GRE test takers may experience, and we'd welcome any suggestions you might have.

Would you please take lo-15 minutes to while the experience of taking the test is then mail it to us in the enclosed self-add important for our research that we get your your test scores. Your responses will be t not affect your GRE scores in any way, so p your responses.

comple still ressed

react reated Ilease

te this questionnaire now fresh in your mind, and

envelope? It is ions before you receive

confidentially and will be completely frank in

For your help we are able to provide you some feedback on how your responses to this survey compare with those of other GRE examinees. If you'd like to know how nervous you were compared with other GRE test takers, please check the box below.

Thanks for your help.

Sincerely,

Donald E. Powers Project Director

Yes, I'd like information on how my answers compare with those of other GRE test takers.

cl

I. DIRECTIONS: For each statement Strongly disagree (1) below, please indicate how you Disagree-(2) generally felt about your recent Neither agree nor disagree experience in taking the GRE Agree (4) General Test. (Circle one Strongly agree (5) number for each statement.)

1. I felt unsure and tense while taking the GRE General test........................ . . .

. . . 2. While taking the test I had an uneasy, upset feeling

3. Thinking about the scores I'd get interfered with my work on the test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4. I froze up on the test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . l

. . .

5. During the test I found myself thinking about whether I'll get into graduate school. . . . . . . . . . .

6. The harder I worked at taking the test, the more confused I got . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

7. Thoughts of doing poorly interfered with my concentration on the test . . . . . . . . . . . .

8. I felt very jittery when taking the test . . . . . .

. . .

. . .

9. Even when I'm well prepared for a test like the GRE, I feel very nervous about it. . . . . . . . . . . . .

10. I'll start feeling very uneasy just before getting my test scores back. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . 11. During the test I felt very tense. . . . . . . . . .

12. I wish examinations like the GRE did not bother me somuch....................... . . .

13. During the test I was so tense that my stomach got upset........................ . . .

1 14. I seem to defeat myself while working on tests like theGRE.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15. I felt very panicky when I took the test . . . . . .

. . .

. . .

. . . 16. I worried a great deal before taking the GRE . . . .

17. During the test I found myself thinking about the consequences of failing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . s .

. . . 18. I felt my heart beating very fast during the test. .

19. After the test was over I tried to stop worrying about it, but I just couldn't. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

20. During the test I got so nervous that I forgot facts I really knew. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l . .

i

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

J, 4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

(3)

I

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

1 2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

i

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

-2-

Strongly disagree (1) II. Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with each of these statements:

Disagree (2) Neither agree nor disagree (3)

Agree Strongly agree (5)

(4)

i

4

4

4

4

4

4

1. If you take the GRE more than once, graduate schools usually consider only your highest score . . . . . . . . .

Once you've taken the GRE, there is no way to keep test scores from becoming part of your test record . . . .

2.

3.

4.

Many graduate schools set minimum GRE score levels below which virtually no applicants are accepted . . . . .

Test scores are becoming less important in graduate admissions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5. If you panic or "freeze up" on the GRE, you can have your test score erased from your record . . . . . . .

6. GRE scores are good indicators of a student's ability to do graduate level work. . . . . . . . . . . . .

III. Please think of yourself in each of these situations and indicate how you have felt (or would feel).

Extremely Somewhat Not at All Nervous Nervous Nervous

Speaking before a small audience. . . . . . . 5 4 3 2 1 1.

2. Being interviewed for a job or for admission to graduate school. . . . . . . , . 5 4

3.

4.

Taking a driving test for a license . . . . . 5 4 3 2

Preparing for a difficult end-of-semester course examination. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4

5.

6.

Going for a dental checkup. . . . . . . . . . 5 4 3 2

Taking a graduate school admissions test (like the GRE). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4

7. Competing in a contest or athletic event. . . 5 4

3 2

3 2

3 2

? 3 .J & 1

-3-

IV. Please rate your nervousness at each of the following times.

Extremely Somewhat Not at All Nervous Nervous Nervous

Times

1. When registering to take the test. . . . . .

2. Immediately before taking the test . . . . .

3. During the test 1. Verbal Section. . . . . . . . . . . 2. Quantitative Section. . . . . . . . 3. Analytical Section. . . . . . . . .

4. Immediately after the test . . . . . . . . .

5. Now, waiting for your test scores. . . . . .

V. How important do you think each of the following factors is in determining admission to the graduate field you plan to enter?

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

1 7.

GRE General Test scores. ..........

GRE Subject Test scores. ..........

Grades in college. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Impressions made in interviews . . . . . . .

Recommendations from professors. . . . . . .

Participation in extracurricular activities.

Academic reputation of your college. . . . .

5 4

5 4

5 4 5 4 5 4

5 4

5 4

Extremely Important

5 4

5 4

5 4

5 4

5 4

5 4

5 4

3

3

3 3 3

3

3

2 1

2 1

2 1 2 1 2 1

2 1

2 1

Somewhat Not at all Important Important

3 2 1

3 2 1

3 2 1

3 2 1

3 2 1

3 2 1

3 2 1

VI. What is your estimate of the percentage of GRE test takers who:

1. Are accepted at the graduate school that is their first choice. % --

2. Are accepted at some graduate school, but not necessarily their first choice. % --

3. Reach all but the final question or two on each section of the GRE. % --

4. Correctly answer at least 75% of the questions on the GRE. % --

-4-

VII. What percentage of GRE test takers do you think correctly answered questions like the following:

(a) Choose the word that best fits the meaning of the sentence as a whole.

Atoms, atomic nuclei, protons, and neutrons were all thought to be at various times in the twentieth century, until further

experimentation unearthed their constituent parts.

(A) inseparable (B) hypothetical (C) unique (D) indivisible (E) integrated % --

(b) Choose the phrase that is most nearly opposite in meaning to the word in capital letters.

IRASCIBLE: (A) quickly changing (B) self-satisfied (C) very reluctant

(D) even-tempered (E) readily apparent

(c> What is the area of AABC above?

(A)6+fi (B)3+fi (C)v

(D) 2 (E) 1

Cd) ,fl-A=&, then x =

% --

% --

(A) 2

(B) 1

(0; 03 -1

(El -2 % --

-5-

(e) Five individual components V, W, X, Y, and 2, can be arranged in exactly five different functional configurations, numbered 1 through 5.

Each component appears in exactly three of these configurations. Configuration 1 consists of exactly three components, including Z. Configuration 2 consists of V only. Configuration 3 does not include V, X, or Z. Configuration 4 consists of fewer components than does configuration 5.

Configuration 5 consists of how many components?

(A) Five (B) Four (C) Three (D) Two (E) One % --

VIII. Please indicate if you have: No Yes

A. Previously taken the GRE General Test 0 1

B. Completed the practice test in the GRE Information Bulletin 0 1

c. Completed other GRE practice tests available from the testing program 0 1

IX. Were there any aspects of your recent GRE test taking experience that made you nervous or uneasy? Do you have any suggestions that might decrease test takers' anxiety?

Today's date -- Month Day

Thank you for participating in ollr stlldy*

"A portion of this questionnaire is based on material that was modified and used by special permission of the publisher, Consulting Psychologist Press, Inc. from copyright material, 1980. Further reproduction is prohibited without the written permission of the publisher." Copyright 0 1984 by Educational Testing Service. All rights reserved.

test anxiety and the gre general test - ets home · pdf filetest anxiety and the gre general...

Documents