Cassady Jerrell C, Tan Ser Hong, Robiullah Al, Badzovski Isabella, Janiuk Jessica
Department of Educational Psychology, Teachers College, Ball State University, Muncie, IN 47306, USA.
Centre for Research in Child Development and Science of Learning in Education Centre, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 637616, Singapore.
Behav Sci (Basel). 2025 Mar 7;15(3):331. doi: 10.3390/bs15030331.
Test anxiety research has been dominated by attention to theory building and examining the causes and consequences of this construct. However, recently, considerable attention has been turned toward using test anxiety as a diagnostic indicator of students who are at risk of underperforming in educational settings. This systematic review of the literature was focused on (a) describing the strategies used in the field, (b) highlighting the benefits and limitations of those approaches, and (c) offering guidance in creating a framework for appropriate methods when identifying severity levels on measures of test anxiety for university students. The results confirmed that the vast majority of studies on test anxiety have no formal "leveling" approaches (maintaining test anxiety as a continuous variable). However, when researchers do employ "leveling" strategies, the majority adopt inappropriate methods (e.g., single-sample splits). However, there are exemplars that demonstrate statistically sound procedures for identifying distinct profiles of test anxiety that may form a basis to build consensus around a classification method for elevated test anxiety.
考试焦虑研究一直侧重于理论构建以及考察这一概念的成因和后果。然而，最近人们相当关注将考试焦虑用作教育环境中可能表现不佳的学生的诊断指标。这篇文献的系统综述聚焦于：（a）描述该领域所使用的策略；（b）突出这些方法的优点和局限性；（c）为在确定大学生考试焦虑测量的严重程度时创建适当方法的框架提供指导。结果证实，绝大多数关于考试焦虑的研究没有正式的“分级”方法（将考试焦虑作为一个连续变量）。然而，当研究人员确实采用“分级”策略时，大多数采用的是不适当的方法（例如，单样本分割）。不过，有一些范例展示了用于识别考试焦虑不同特征的统计学上合理的程序，这些程序可能成为围绕考试焦虑升高的分类方法达成共识的基础。
