The present study with 2,273 students aimed to examine the factorial validity of the Anxiety Questionnaire for Students (AFS) by using the bifactor modeling framework, that is, contrasting a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model to an exploratory structural equation model (ESEM) and two bifactor models (B-CFA and B-ESEM). In addition, measurement invariance and latent mean differences in the three facets of the AFS (test anxiety, manifest anxiety, dislike of school) across gender, age groups, and school types were explored. Results provided strong support for the multidimensionality of the AFS. The B-ESEM showed the best fit to the data as opposed to the other models. Also, measurement invariance across gender, age groups, and school types was fully supported. Girls and younger students generally reported higher levels of anxiety than boys and older students, while the latter stated more dislike of school than girls and younger students. Furthermore, elementary school students showed generally higher levels of anxiety than students of the other school types.
AsparouhovT.MuthénB. O.MorinA. J. S. (2015). Bayesian structural equation modeling with cross-loadings and residual covariances: Comments on Stromeyer et al. Journal of Management, 41, 1561-1577. doi:10.1177/0149206315591075
3.
AsparouhovT.MuthénB. O.MuthénB. (2006). Robust chi square difference testing with mean and variance adjusted test statistics. Matrix, 1(5), 1-6.
4.
ChengL.KlingerD.FoxJ.DoeC.JinY.WuJ. (2014). Motivation and test anxiety in test performance across three testing contexts: The CAEL, CET, and GEPT. TESOL Quarterly, 48, 300-330. doi:10.1002/tesq.105
5.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233-255. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
6.
DanO.RazS. (2012). The relationships among ADHD, self-esteem, and test anxiety in young adults. Journal of Attention Disorders, 19, 231-239. doi:10.1177/1087054712454571
7.
GignacG. E.WatkinsM. W. (2013). Bifactor modeling and the estimation of model-based reliability in the WAIS-IV. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 48, 639-662. doi:10.1080/00273171.2013.804398
8.
GnambsT.HanfstinglB. (2016). The decline of academic motivation during adolescence: An accelerated longitudinal cohort analysis on the effect of psychological need satisfaction. Educational Psychology, 36, 1691-1705. doi:10.1080/01443410.2015.1113236
9.
GötzT.BiegM.LüdtkeO.PekrunR.HallN. C. (2013). Do girls really experience more anxiety in mathematics?Psychological Science, 24, 2079-2087. doi:10.1177/0956797613486989
10.
HillF.MammarellaI. C.DevineA.CaviolaS.PassolunghiM. C.SzűcsD. (2016). Maths anxiety in primary and secondary school students: Gender differences, developmental changes and anxiety specificity. Learning and Individual Differences, 48, 45-53. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2016.02.006
11.
HuL.-T.BentlerP. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424-453.
12.
KlasenF.PetermannF.MeyroseA.-K.BarkmannC.OttoC.HallerA.-C.. . . Ravens-SiebererU. (2016). Verlauf psychischer Auffälligkeiten von Kindern und Jugendlichen [Trajectories of mental health problems in children and adolescents: Results of the BELLA cohort study]. Kindheit und Entwicklung, 25, 10-20. doi:10.1026/0942-5403/a000184
13.
LeroyN.BressouxP. (2016). Does amotivation matter more than motivation in predicting mathematics learning gains? A longitudinal study of sixth-grade students in France. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44-45, 41-53. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.02.001
14.
LinleyP. A.DoveyH.BeaumontS.WilkinsonJ.HurlingR. (2016). Examining the intensity and frequency of experience of discrete positive emotions. Journal of Happiness Studies, 17, 875-892. doi:10.1007/s10902-015-9619-7
15.
MarshH. W.HauK. T. (2007). Applications of latent-variable models in educational psychology: The need for methodological-substantive synergies. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 151-170. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.10.008
16.
MarshH. W.LiemG. A. D.MartinA. J.MorinA. J. S.NagengastB. (2011). Methodological measurement fruitfulness of exploratory structural equation model: New approaches to issues in motivation and engagement. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29, 322-346. doi:10.1177/0734282911406657
17.
MarshH. W.MorinA. J. S.ParkerP.KaurG. (2014). Exploratory structural equation modeling: An integration of the best features of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 10, 85-110. doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032813-153700
18.
McDonaldR. P. (1970). The theoretical foundations of common factor analysis, principal factor analysis, and alpha factor analysis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 23, 1-21. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8317.1970.tb00432.x
19.
MorinA. J. S.ArensA. K.MarshH. W. (2016a). A bifactor exploratory structural equation modeling framework for the identification of distinct sources of construct-relevant psychometric multidimensionality. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 23, 116-139. doi:10.1080/10705511.2014.961800
20.
MorinA. J. S.ArensA. K.TranA.CaciH. (2016b). Exploring sources of construct-relevant multidimensionality in psychiatric measurement: A tutorial and illustration using the Composite Scale of Morningness. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 25, 277-288. doi:10.1002/mpr.1485
21.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (2018). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles, CA: Author.
22.
NitkowskiD.LohbeckA.PetermannU.PetermannF. (2017). Hat die Angstausprägung bei Kindern und Jugendlichen in Deutschland von 1974 bis 2016 zugenommen? [Has anxiety in German children and adolescents increased from 1974 to 2016? Cross-temporal analysis of anxiety over a period of 42 years]. Kindheit und Entwicklung, 26, 110-117. doi:10.1026/0942-5403/a000222
23.
PekrunR.LichtenfeldS.MarshH. W.MurayamaK.GötzT. (2017). Achievement emotions and academic performance: Longitudinal models of reciprocal effects. Child Development, 88, 1653-1670. doi:10.1111/cdev.12704
24.
PerreiraT. A.MorinA. J. S.HebertM.GilletN.HouleS. A.BertaW. (2018). The short form of the Workplace Affective Commitment Multidimensional Questionnaire (WACMQ-S): A bifactor-ESEM approach among healthcare professionals. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 106, 62-83. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2017.12.004
25.
ReiseS. P. (2012). The rediscovery of bifactor measurement models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47, 667-696. doi:10.1080/00273171.2012.715555
26.
ReiseS. P.MooreT. M.HavilandM. G. (2010). Bifactor models and rotations: Exploring the extent to which multidimensional data yield univocal scale scores. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 544-559. doi:10.1080/00223891.2010.496477
27.
SimmsL. J.GrösD. F.WatsonD.O’HaraM. (2008). Parsing general and specific components of depression and anxiety with bifactor modeling. Depression and Anxiety, 25, 34-46. doi:10.1002/da.20432
28.
SpielbergerC. D.VaggP. R. (1995). Test anxiety: Theory, assessment and treatment. Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.
29.
WiesczerkowskiW.NickelH.JanowskiA.FittkauB.RauerW.PetermannF. (2016). Angstfragebogen für Schüler [Anxiety questionnaire for students] (7th ed.). Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
30.
ZeidnerM. (1998). Test anxiety: The state of the art. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
