EmailMeForm



Brief Effective Strategies for Stress-Test: Examining Changes to Test Anxiety A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of theRequirements of the Renée Crown University Honors Program atSyracuse UniversityCharlene FowajuhCandidate for Bachelor of Scienceand Renée Crown University HonorsSpring 2020Honors Thesis in PsychologyThesis Advisor: _______________________ Joshua Felver, Assistant ProfessorThesis Reader: _______________________ Sara Burke, Assistant ProfessorHonors Director: _______________________ Dr. Danielle Smith, Director AbstractThe following study examined changes to test anxiety and math anxiety among a group of college students taking an undergraduate Calculus 1 course. Participants were randomly assigned to three different conditions: the mindfulness-based programming group which was supported with the curriculum Soles of the Feet (SoF) (n = 9); the active intervention control which utilized a cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) based test anxiety intervention program (n = 8); and the active non-intervention control, also known as a the psychoeducation group, who weren’t provided any strategies for their test anxiety and would meet to read articles/have discussions (n = 8). Data was collected before (Time 1) and after (Time 2) the intervention took place in order to explore changes to test anxiety, math anxiety, and mindfulness. This data was werewas then analyzed using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) in order to assess if whether there were any differences among our three conditions (SoF, CBT, and Psychoeducation) at the time of the pre-intervention and post-intervention. Results weren’t statistically significant and indicated that there weren’t any differences in outcome scores at pre- and post-intervention. These results are discussed in terms of limitations and future research.Executive Summary This research, overseen by Dr. Joshua Felver, Ph.D., was designed to explore changes to test anxiety, math anxiety, as well as the level of mindfulness between groups undergoing different conditions over a two-and-a-half-week period. Students from the course were randomly assigned to three different conditions: the mindfulness-based programming group which was supported with the technique Soles of the Feet (SoF) (n = 9); the active intervention control which utilized a cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) based test anxiety intervention program (n = 8); and the active non-intervention control group which used a psychoeducation program without as participants weren’t provided any strategies for their managing test anxiety and would meet to read articles/have discussions (n = 8). Furthermore, validated scales were used to measure test anxiety, math anxiety, and mindfulness. To asses test anxiety, participants completed the Test Anxiety Inventory (TAI), which is a 20-item self-reported questionnaire was utilized (Spielberg, 2010). The Abbreviated Math Anxiety Scale (AMAS), a 9-item self-reported questionnaire, was employed to asses math anxiety, and for mindfulness, the 14-item self-reportedd adolescent version of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS-A) was used (Hopko et al., 2003; Brown et al., 2011). The students who elected to undergo the study (n = 25) were predominantly male men (n = 17) with some females women (n = 8) and consisted of mostly of freshmen (n = 22) with some sophomores (n = 3). The mean age of students recruited for the study was 18 years and 10 months (SD = 7.5 months). Of the participants a majority were White (n = 13), followed by Asian (n = 6), then Hispanic (n = 4), and lastly, Mixed (n = 2). Data were collected before the intervention (Time 1) and after the intervention took place (Time 2) to compare changes to test anxiety, math anxiety, and level of mindfulness.The use of mindfulness-based programming (MBP) can significantly lower levels of anxiety and psychological distress, in comparison to cognitive behavioral therapy and psychoeducation. The term “mindfulness” refers to a nonjudgmental awareness of one’s immediate experiences. Therefore, mMindfulness-based programs (MBPs) are a therapeutic method that through strengthening one’s the ability to non-judgmentally focus on the present, and can help increase clarity and concentration while decreasing negative moods, anxiety, and depression. Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) refers to a form of treatment that focuses on identifying, understanding, and changing thinking and behavior patterns while psychoeducation solely provides information to better understand a given mental disorder. The mindfulness programming Soles of the Feet (SoF; Singh et al., 2007) teaches individuals to redirect attention to the sensations of their feet when they are experiencing unpleasant emotional states that hinder their ability to function normally. The active intervention control utilized the Comprehensive School-Based Test Anxiety and Related Problems Intervention Program which is a subtype of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT; Weems et al., 2010). This intervention is comprised composed of: psychoeducation,; developing a hierarchy of test anxiety experiences,; relaxation strategies,; and daily home practice. The active non-intervention control was based on psychoeducation alone; participants weren’t provided any strategies and only focused on test anxiety as the topic of discussion. Participants in this group met to engage in individual and small-group academic activities and held discussions of various anxiety topics (e.g., “what is anxiety?”; test anxiety; anxiety in college). Each of the aforementioned conditions were matched for contact time,; the structure of practice and discussion,; between-session practice assignments,; and topical focus on test anxiety. My aim with this research was to address the following a priori question. In comparison to cognitive behavioral therapy and psychoeducation, are mindfulness-based programs more effective in alleviating symptoms of test anxiety? With this research question, I hypothesized that among our three conditions (SoF, CBT, and Psychoeducation) there won’t be any differences in measure scores (TAI, AMAS, and MAAS-A) at the time of the pre-intervention (Time 1) but there will be a significant difference at the time of post-intervention (Time 2).This study was necessary to uncover other methods of treatment that could aid in supporting college students’ academic success. College students experience many different situations that can increase their anxiety levels, and one of the core triggers is their academic performance. The use of test-taking to measure one’s performance has been shown to add pressure to succeed in a way that leaves students feeling test-anxious. These experiences of test anxiety have been shown to negatively impact students as it’s been found that --those that are test-anxious are more likely to underperform and attain significantly lower levels of academic achievements as compared academically relative to their other classmates who don’t experience test anxiety (Weems et al., 2010, 2015; Hembree,1988). Generally speaking, the implications of mental unwellness has also been shown to negatively affect many aspects of well-being, including alcohol and substance abuse, and one’s future employment and interpersonal relationships (Eisenberg et. al., 2007). These detrimental implications coupled with the alarming rates of test-anxiety in students show a need for further research into methods that could combat this form of anxiety. Moreover, mental health providers on college campuses have noted the growing number of students with anxiety disorders, increasing the and because of this, a specific need for therapy styles that are time efficient. This research could also serve to provide a further understanding of the efficacy and underlying processes involved in mindfulness since further research is needed in understanding and supporting this growing field.Table of ContentsProject Body 8-23Introduction 8Literature Review 11Methods 13Results18Discussion and Future Research20Sources Cited24-26Introduction Most mental disorders have their first onset usually during or before the start of college and these problems are further exacerbated by the variety of stressors experienced in college such as academic pressures (Eisenberg et al., 2007). Beiter et al. (2015) conducted a study in which the results indicated that the top three concerns for students were academic performance, the pressure to succeed, and post-graduation plans. Furthermore, they stated that demographically, “...the most stressed, anxious, and depressed students were transfers, upperclassmen, and those living off-campus” (p. 92; Beiter et. al., 2015). The implications of mental unwellness include many aspects of well-being, including alcohol and substance abuse, academic success, and future employment and relationships (Eisenberg et. al., 2007). Specifically, a huge component of academic life in college involves measuring student achievement through test-taking, this coupled with the pressure to succeed and perform well academically often causes one to feel test anxious (Nicaise, 1995). The American Test Anxieties Association states that 34-38% of U.S. students experience test anxiety and this increases in severity as students transition into college (Whitaker Sena, 2007). A study conducted by Dan, Ilan, and Kurman (2014) supports these findings, as their research found that test anxiety occurs in an estimated 1/3 of U.S. students. Test anxiety can be felt before or during a test and its symptoms can manifest themselves through physical, physiological, and cognitive means. Some students report excessive sweating, increased heart rate, and difficulties concentrating while being test anxious which are each an example of typical physical, physiological, and cognitive symptoms, respectively. As a consequence of experiencing test-anxiety, researchers have found that students are consistently underperforming on tests as well as their level of academic achievement is significantly lower in comparison to other non-anxious students (Weems et al., 2010; 2015; Hembree, 1988). As for treatment methods, in comparison to other treatment forms such as cognitive behavioral therapy (a form of treatment that focuses on identifying, understanding, and changing thinking and behavior patterns), mindfulness has been shown to have the same effects in lowering levels of anxiety, psychological distress, depression, and rumination (Davis & Hayes, 2011). The practice of mindfulness stems from meditation which originated thousands of years ago within Hindu traditions and various other religions such as Buddhism. The term "mindfulness" has been referred to as a psychological state of awareness (Davis & Hayes, 2011). Furthermore, this practice emphasizes awareness of one's immediate experiences, whether internal or external, without making any judgments. The terms attention and awareness are important in understanding mindfulness since their integration has helped to differentiate mindfulness from related states. In recent years the practice of mindfulness has become incorporated into many different treatments for psychological disorders because of its remarkable benefits. Included in its benefits are increased awareness, clarity, and concentration; while decreasing symptoms of negative moods (Walsh & Shapiro, 2006). For example, a study conducted by Chambers et al. (2008) asked for its 20 participants to take part in a 10-day mindfulness meditation retreat. After this retreat, those in the meditation group reported a significant decrease in negative affect when compared with those in the control group. Hoffman et al. (2010) also conducted a meta-analysis of various studies that explored mindfulness-based stress reduction and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy. The researchers concluded that mindfulness-based therapy could be very useful in altering the underlying cognitive processes of different disorders. Furthermore, this is consistent with evidence that mindfulness increases positive affect and decreases negative affect. This study is necessary to uncover other methods of treatment that could aid in supporting college students’ academic success. College students experience many different situations that can increase their anxiety levels, and one of the core triggers is their academic performance. It will also serve to provide a further understanding of the efficacy and underlying processes involved in mindfulness since further research is needed in understanding the topic. Additionally, while doing a literature review, it was notable what little research has been done examining test anxiety and mindfulness within college populations. ?Literature Review Eisenberg et al. (2007) found that 15.6% of undergraduates and 13% of graduate students suffered from either anxiety or depression and of that, suicidal ideation was reported by 2% of students in both undergrad and grad samples. By investigating potential correlates of depression, anxiety, and stress in a sample of college students Beiter et al. (2015) found that their top three concerns were academic performance, the pressure to succeed, and post-graduation plans. In the end, these researchers highlighted the need for schools to look into programs that could promote a healthier mental state among their students. The following studies were examined in trying to support the effect of mindfulness-based interventions on test anxiety and in general, emotional stability. In a study conducted by Weems et al. (2010), the researchers administered an intervention that combined relaxation training with gradual exposure to anxiety-provoking test-related stimuli to 94 ninth graders from New Orleans. The results of this study indicated that the intervention reduced test anxiety symptoms and was related to relative academic improvement. Additionally, the GPAs of the test anxious group improved which indicates the significant role test-anxiety played in these students’ lives. Weems et al. (2015) conducted another study with the same intervention but this time with 325 at-risk youth aged 8–17 years who showed elevated test anxiety levels. The results demonstrated that the intervention was associated with decreases in test anxiety, anxiety disorder, and depression symptoms. Additionally, research has found that emotional reactions exhibit a lifecycle, and mindfulness can shorten the cycle by reducing the amount of time to return to baseline after reaching an emotional peak. In one study, mindfulness sped recovery from negative emotions after a mood induction (Keng et al., 2013). Macdonald et al. (2017), conducted research that suggests that female college students exhibiting greater dispositional mindfulness skills demonstrate heightened emotional awareness and control, as well as a better ability to tolerate negative thoughts, which is an important skill in improving psychological health. The following study sought to address the following a priori question. In comparison to cognitive behavioral therapy and psychoeducation, are mindfulness-based programs more effective in alleviating symptoms of test anxiety? With this research question, I hypothesized that among our three groups (SoF, CBT, and Psychoeducation) there won’t be any differences in measure scores (TAI, AMAS, and MAAS-A) before the intervention takes place (Time 1) but there will be a significant difference at the time of post-intervention (Time 2). Methods Pre- and post- data were collected to explore changes to test anxiety, math anxiety, and mindfulness using the Test Anxiety Inventory (TAI), Abbreviated Math Anxiety Scale (AMAS), and Mindful Attention Awareness Scale for adolescents (MAAS-A), respectively. Specifically, this research was done using the quantitative method and the experimental design, with three different conditions being tested. Each group was required to attend five 30-minute sessions over the course of a two-and-a-half-week period. Group one underwent a brief mindfulness-based program that utilized the technique Soles of the Feet. The development of Soles of the Feet (SoF) was originally focused on helping adults with intellectual and psychiatric disabilities reduce occurrences of aggression but this intervention has been adapted and is now being used within schools (Felver & Singh, in press). This mindfulness-based programming teaches individuals to redirect attention to the sensations of their feet when they are experiencing unpleasant emotional states that hinder their ability to function normally. By intentionally paying attention to the neutral somatic sensations in their feet they can reduce the intensity of their negative mood (Singh et al., 2007). It’s important to note that, to be most effective SoF relies on repeated practice during intervention sessions and between sessions.Group two, the active intervention control, utilized a different test-anxiety intervention control. Comprehensive School-Based Test Anxiety and Related Problems Intervention Program is a form of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) used for test anxiety (Weems et al., 2010). This intervention is comprised of: psychoeducation; developing a hierarchy of test anxiety experiences; relaxation strategies; and daily home practice. This control intervention was selected because the numbers and length of sessions match those of the other conditions as well. Additionally, like the other two conditions, it uses anxiety reduction strategies, and between-session practice assignments to build fluency. Lastly, there is also empirical evidence of its effectiveness for reducing test anxiety (Weems et al., 2010; 2015).Group three, the active non-intervention control, weren’t provided any strategies and underwent psychoeducation by only focusing on test anxiety as the topic of discussion. Participants in this active control condition read articles, met to engage in individual and small-group academic activities, and held discussions of various anxiety topics (e.g., “what is anxiety?”; test anxiety; anxiety in college). This condition was matched to the aforementioned conditions for contact time; the structure of practice and discussion; between-session practice assignments; and topical focus on test anxiety. ParticipantsTable 1 details participant characteristics. Participants were recruited from a Calculus 1 course and 25 students (68% male) consented to the study with a majority of them being freshmen (n = 22) and some sophomores (n = 3). The mean age of students recruited for the study was 18 years and 10 months (SD = 7.5 months). Of the participants a majority were White (n = 13), followed by Asian (n = 6), then Hispanic (n = 4), and lastly, Mixed (n = 2). Finally, within each condition, we had one more person in the SoF group (n = 9) in comparison to the CBT (n = 8) and the Psychoeducation (n = 8) groups which had equal amounts of participants.Table 1 Sociodemographic Characteristics of ParticipantsDemographicn%Gender Male1768?? Female832Race? White1352??? Asian?624?? Hispanic?416 ?Mixed?2 8Year in college?????Freshman (1st year) 22?88???Sophomore (2nd year)?3?12Condition ?? Mindfulness-Based Programming (Soles of the Feet)936 Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy832 Psychoeducation 832VariablesThe independent variable was represented with the implementation of the three interventions, while the dependent variable was represented by the levels of test anxiety, math anxiety, and mindfulness that were recorded after the intervention. MeasuresParticipants’ test anxiety and math anxiety severity, as well as their level of mindfulness, were assessed at the beginning and end of the two-and-a-half-week period. First, for gauging their levels of test anxiety, the Test Anxiety Inventory (TAI; Spielberg, 2010) was used. This is a 20-item self-report questionnaire that asks participants to report on a 4- point Likert-scale ranging from “almost never” to “almost always” to statements such as “I feel confident and relaxed while taking exams”. Additionally, this scale can be further broken down to subscales that measure emotionality (TAI-E) and worry (TAI-W). Previous studies have found the internal reliability values of the TAI are high within the total inventory (α = 0.96), the TAI-E subscale (α = 0.91), and the TAI-W subscale (α = 0.91) (Spielberg, 2010). To measure levels of math anxiety the Abbreviated Math Anxiety Scale was employed (Hopko et al., 2003). The Abbreviated Math Anxiety Scale is a 9-item self-report questionnaire that asks participants to report on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (low anxiety) to 5 (high anxiety), how they feel towards statements such as “Having to use tables in the back of a math book”. In developing the scale, Hopko et. al (2003), found the internal consistency was excellent for the AMAS (α = .90).The adapted adolescent version of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale-Adolescents (MAAS-A; Brown et al., 2011) was used to measure the individual’s frequency and strength of mindfulness. The MAAS-A is a 14-item self-report questionnaire of adolescent mindfulness which when tested by Brown et al. (2011) was found to have a good internal consistency (α = 0.82). Participants are provided statements such as with items such as “I find myself preoccupied with the future or the past” to which they must select an option on a 6-point Likert-scale ranging from “almost always” to “almost never” (Brown et al., 2011). Data Analysis The a priori research strategy was to test for group differences at Time 1 and at Time 2 using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to analyze the differences among our three conditions (SoF, CBT, and Psychoeducation). With this research, I hypothesized that among our three conditions there won’t be any differences in measure scores (TAI, AMAS, and MAAS-A) at the time of the pre-intervention (Time 1) but there will be a significant difference at the time of post-intervention (Time 2).ResultsTable 2 shows the means and standard deviations of the self-reported inventory scores taken at Time 1 and Time 2 for each condition. It’s important to note that at Time 1 there were 25 participants, but this number dropped to 23 participants at Time 2. Additionally, for the TAI, AMAS, and MAAS-A a higher score reflects higher levels of test anxiety, math anxiety, and mindfulness. Scoring the MAAS-A also requires you to calculate the mean of the score obtained (i.e. the sum of answers divided by the total number of questions).Table 2Means and Standard Deviation Descriptive Statistics of Inventory Scales at Time 1 and Time 2 for SoF, CBT, and Psychoeducation Groups Inventory ScaleSoles of the Feet (MBP) CBTPsychoeducationT1T2T1T2T1T2 ?TAI48.4 (14.2)45.7 (13.2)50.1 (16.1)48.13 (14.4)48.5 (14.1)44.67 (18.3)?AMAS14.3 (6.4)13.1 (7.4)14.6 (10.1)14.9 (11.1)16.6 (10.2)15.3 (9.5)MAAS-A2.50 (0.86)2.21 (1.09)2.31 (1.00)2.45 (1.26)2.71 (0.88)2.67 (1.16)Note: T1 = Time 1 pre-intervention timepoint; T2 = Time 2 post-intervention timepoint; TAI = Test Anxiety Inventors; AMAS = Abbreviated Math Anxiety Scale; and MAAS-A = Mindful Attention Awareness Scale-AdolescentsOne-way ANOVAs were conducted for each of the three measures (TAI, AMAS, and MAAS-A) to compare the means of the three conditions (SoF, CBT, and psychoeducation) at Time 1. It was concluded that there is no significant difference in mean inventory scores due to the condition the participant was in at Time 1 for test anxiety (TAI) F(2, 22) = 0.102,?p?= 0.903; math anxiety (AMAS), F(2, 22) = 0.159,?p?= 0.854, and; mindfulness (MAAS-A), F(2, 22) = 0.385,?p?= 0.732. This suggests that the groups did not differ in their outcomes scores at the pre-intervention timepoint.One-way ANOVAs were conducted for each of the three measures (TAI, AMAS, and MAAS-A) to compare the means of the three conditions (SoF, CBT, and psychoeducation) at Time 2. It was concluded that there is no significant difference in mean inventory scores due to the condition the participant was in at Time 2 for test anxiety (TAI),?F(2, 20) = 0.102,?p?= 0.904; math anxiety (AMAS), F(2, 20) = 0.125,?p?= 0.883, and; mindfulness (MAAS-A), F(2, 20) = 0.317,?p?= 0.732. This suggests that the groups did not differ in their outcomes scores at the post-intervention timepoint.Discussion and Future Research For all three conditions (SoF, CBT, and psychoeducation), mean scores for the TAI ranged from M = 48.5 to M = 50.1 and with the possibility of scoring between 20 and 80, the mean results from this sample show that their level of test anxiety wasn’t significantly high at the beginning of the study. As for the AMAS, these scores ranged from M = 14.3 to M = 16.6, and with a possibility of scoring between 9 and 45, the mean values from this sample show that their level of math anxiety was low. For the MAAS-A these averages ranged from M = 2.31 to M = 2.71 and with the possibility of scoring between 1 and 6 the average results obtained from the sample at Time 1 show that at the beginning of the intervention the sample had a somewhat low level of mindfulness. Furthermore, the one-way analysis of variance that was conducted on the Time 1 data supports that the groups did not differ on their outcomes scores at the pre-intervention timepoint. Since this data was collected before the interventions starting, it makes sense that no differences were found as the sample was randomly assigned to each condition and any outliers would’ve been spread across the groups. At the time of post-intervention mean scores from each of the inventory measures were still very similar across all three conditions (SoF, CBT, and psychoeducation). Mean scores for the TAI ranged from M = 44.7 to M = 48.1 and with the possibility of scoring between 20 and 80 on the TAI, the mean results from this sample show that their level of test anxiety wasn’t significantly high. As for the AMAS, these scores ranged from M = 13.1 to M = 15.3, and with a possibility of scoring between 9 and 45, the mean values from this sample show that their level of math anxiety was low. For the MAAS-A these averages ranged from M = 2.21 to M = 2.67 and with the possibility of scoring between 1 and 6, the average results obtained from the sample at Time 2 shows that the sample still retained a low level of mindfulness. Furthermore, the one-way analysis of variance that was conducted on the Time 2 data supports that the groups did not differ on their outcomes scores at the post-intervention timepoint. Consequently, it was concluded that the results do not provide evidence for the effectiveness of the mindfulness-based program Soles of the Feet, cognitive behavioral therapy, and psychoeducation.It was initially hypothesized that at the time of post-intervention (Time 2) there would be a significant difference in the mean scores from the TAI, AMAS, and MAAS-A inventory scales between the Soles of the Feet, cognitive behavioral therapy, and psychoeducation groups. The results from this study are inconsistent with the outcomes of prior research which has found Soles of the Feet, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and psychoeducation to be effective methods for reducing anxiety. This lack of significant results at post-intervention could be due to a multitude of reasons. Being in a mindfulness group one would expect the level of mindfulness should have increased on the MAAS-A for the Soles of the Feet condition, but this group didn’t see a significant change in their level of mindfulness from Time 1 to Time 2. This could explain why there wasn’t a noticeable effect on their TAI and AMAS scores as it shows that their level of mindfulness didn’t increase and therefore couldn’t have made a difference in how they perceived their test-anxiety or math anxiety. In addition, the interventions took place for only two and a half weeks which may have been too short of a time for the different conditions to affect the participants' levels of test anxiety, math anxiety, and mindfulness. As for limitations, first, the low sample size (n = 25), which reduced even more from attrition (n = 23), may have affected the results as a small sample size affects the variability in the data. The smaller the sample the greater the risk of large sample variability which may undermine the ability to detect significant results. Second, although this was a randomized controlled trial, the study was voluntary as students in the Calculus 1 course were given a choice in participating, and, additionally, were rewarded monetarily for volunteering their time which was paid out at the end of each session. This could pose as a limitation since participants in that sense may not have taken the study seriously and could have attended just enough sessions to get “x” amount of money, which could help to explain the attrition over time as some participants missed later sessions and subsequently dropped out, or specifically, missed the time of post-data collection without rescheduling. Moreover, this could also explain the insignificant slight changes in average scores seen at Time 2. In another instance, the monetary gain may have attracted participants who don’t suffer from test or math anxiety. Thus, they may not have truthfully answered each question (e.g. falsifying their out of class practice) which could explain the lack of a significant difference in scores from Time 1 to Time 2. Third, The Test Anxiety Inventory, Abbreviated Math Anxiety Scale, and Mindful Attention and Awareness Scale are all self-report questionnaires. With this is the possibility of bias as this can arise from our need to appear more desirable, and, although participants are asked to be honest, we still tend to falsify our answers to look better. This could have affected the averages obtained as some may have inaccurately reflected their scores at both time-points. Lastly, another limitation develops from the limited analytic abilities of the undergraduate researcher as it would’ve been most effective to analyze the results by taking into account the Time 1 score at Time 2. Future replication of the current study should be done with a larger sample size to allow for the ability to detect intervention effects. With this, research on mindfulness and test-anxiety should examine the two over a longer period to assess the effects of time. Additionally, understanding the relationship between state or trait mindfulness, and test-anxiety may provide implications regarding which aspects to pinpoint in future mindfulness-based programming research. It may also help to examine the effects in different samples, particularly amongst populations that have been found to contain the most test-anxious students. Lastly, future research could also examine if students’ underperformance on tests due to test-anxiety is linked more or less to either one of its two aspects: worry and emotionality.Sources CitedBeiter, R., Nash, R., McCrady, M., Rhoades, D., Linscomb, M., Clarahan, M., & Sammut, S. (2015). The prevalence and correlates of depression, anxiety, and stress in a sample of college students. Journal of affective disorders, 173, 90-96.Brown, K. W., West, A. M., Loverich, T. M., & Biegel, G. M. (2011). Assessing adolescent mindfulness: Validation of an Adapted Mindful Attention Awareness Scale in adolescent normative and psychiatric populations.?Psychological assessment,?23(4), 1023.Chambers, R., Lo, B. C. Y., & Allen, N. B. (2008). The impact of intensive mindfulness training on attentional control, cognitive style, and affect. Cognitive therapy and research, 32(3), 303-322.Dan, O., Bar Ilan, O., & Kurman, J. (2014). Attachment, self-esteem and test anxiety in adolescence and early adulthood.?Educational Psychology,?34(6), 659-673.Davis, D. M., & Hayes, J. A. (2011). What are the benefits of mindfulness? A practice review of psychotherapy-related research.?Psychotherapy,?48(2), 198.Eisenberg, D., Gollust, S. E., Golberstein, E., & Hefner, J. L. (2007). Prevalence and correlates of depression, anxiety, and suicidality among university students. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 77(4), 534-542.Felver, J. C. & Singh, N. N. (in press). Mindfulness in the Classroom: An Evidence-Based Program to Reduce Disruptive Behavior and Increase Academic Engagement. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger Publications.Hembree, R. (1988). Correlates, causes, effects, and treatment of test anxiety.?Review of educational research,?58(1), 47-77.Hofmann, S. G., Sawyer, A. T., Witt, A. A., & Oh, D. (2010). The effect of mindfulness-based therapy on anxiety and depression: A meta-analytic review. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 78(2), 169-83.Hopko, D. R., Mahadevan, R., Bare, R. L., & Hunt, M. K. (2003). The abbreviated math anxiety scale (AMAS) construction, validity, and reliability.?Assessment,?10(2), 178-182.Keng, S. L., Robins, C. J., Smoski, M. J., Dagenbach, J., & Leary, M. R. (2013). Reappraisal and mindfulness: A comparison of subjective effects and cognitive costs. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 51(12), 899-904.MacDonald, H. Z., & Baxter, E. E. (2017). Mediators of the Relationship Between Dispositional Mindfulness and Psychological Well-Being in Female College Students. Mindfulness, 8(2), 398-407.Nicaise, M. (1995). Treating Test Anxiety. A Review of Three Approaches.?Teacher Education and Practice,?11(1), 65-81.Singh, N. N., Lancioni, G. E., Singh Joy, S. D., Winton, A. S., Sabaawi, M., Wahler, R. G., & Singh, J. (2007). Adolescents with conduct disorder can be mindful of their aggressive behavior.?Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders,?15(1), 56-63.Spielberger, C. D. Test Anxiety Inventory. in?The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2010). doi:10.1002/9780470479216.corpsy0985.Walsh, R., & Shapiro, S. L. (2006). The meeting of meditative disciplines and Western psychology: a mutually enriching dialogue. American psychologist, 61(3), 227.Weems, C. F., Scott, B. G., Taylor, L. K., Cannon, M. F., Romano, D. M., Perry, A. M., & Triplett, V. (2010). Test anxiety prevention and intervention programs in schools: Program development and rationale.?School mental health,?2(2), 62-71.Weems, C. F., Scott, B. G., Graham, R. A., Banks, D. M., Russell, J. D., Taylor, L. K., ... & Marino, R. C. (2015). Fitting anxious emotion-focused intervention into the ecology of schools: Results from a test anxiety program evaluation.?Prevention Science,?16(2), 200-210.Whitaker Sena, J. D., Lowe, P. A., & Lee, S. W. (2007). Significant predictors of test anxiety among students with and without learning disabilities.?Journal of learning disabilities,?40(4), 360-376. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download