Many students experience math anxiety, which can negatively affect their academic achievement and even their career choices. One of the most commonly used methods to assess math anxiety is the Abbreviated Math Anxiety Scale (AMAS). Despite the ubiquity of this measure, there is a lack of studies assessing its validity. Moreover, almost all studies have administered the AMAS to a predominantly (>75%) White sample. The present study assessed the validity of the AMAS in a largely underrepresented minority-student (Hispanics and Blacks) sample. The construct validity of the scale was established by showing that students’ AMAS was predictive of both their actual (objective) and predicted (subjective) performance on an arithmetic task. The factor structure of the measure was validated by confirming that the two-factor model was a better fit than the one-factor model. Gender invariance was supported using multi-group confirmatory factor analyses. Overall, the results of the present study provide further evidence on the validity of the AMAS and its use among underrepresented minority college students.
AdkinsM.NoyesA. (2016). Reassessing the economic value of advanced level mathematics. British Educational Research Journal, 42(1), 93–116. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3219
2.
AshcraftM. H.FaustM. W. (1994). Mathematics anxiety and mental arithmetic performance: An exploratory investigation. Cognition and Emotion, 8(2), 97–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699939408408931
3.
AshcraftM. H.KirkE. P. (2001). The relationships among working memory, math anxiety, and performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130(2), 224–237. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.130.2.224
4.
AshcraftM. H.MooreA. M. (2009). Mathematics anxiety and the affective drop in performance. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 27(9), 197–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282908330580
5.
BarrosoC.GanleyC. M.McGrawA. L.GeerE. A.HartS. A.DaucourtM. C. (2021). A meta-analysis of the relation between math anxiety and math achievement. Psychological Bulletin, 147(2), 134–168. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000307
Brosseau-LiardP. E.SavaleiV.LiL. (2012). An investigation of the sample performance of two nonnormality corrections for RMSEA. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47(6), 904–930. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2012.715252
8.
BrownT. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. The Guilford Press.
9.
CaviolaS.PrimiC.ChiesiF.MammarellaI. C. (2017). Psychometric properties of the Abbreviated Math Anxiety Scale (AMAS) in Italian primary school children. Learning and Individual Differences, 55(174), 182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.03.006
10.
ChenF. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834
11.
CheryanS. (2012). Understanding the paradox in math-related fields: Why do some gender gaps remain while others do not?Sex Roles, 66(3–4), 184–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-0060-z
12.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
13.
ChoK. W. (2021). A hack for learning math: Starting and ending on high notes to create a more pleasurable learning experience. Educational Psychology, 41(9), 1082–1096. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2021.1934404
14.
CiporaK.SzczygiełM.WillmesK.NuerkH. C. (2015). Math anxiety assessment with the Abbreviated Math Anxiety Scale: Applicability and usefulness: Insights from the Polish adaptation. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(1833), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01833
ConlonR. A.HicksA.BarrosoC.GanleyC. M. (2021). The effect of the timing of math anxiety measurement on math outcomes. Learning and Individual Differences, 86, 101962. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101962
17.
DowkerA.SarkarA.LooiC. Y. (2016). Mathematics anxiety: What have we learned in 60 years?Frontiers in Psychology, 7(508), 508. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00508
FlakeJ. K.PekJ.HehmanE. (2017). Construct validation in social and personality research: Current practice and recommendations. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(4), 370–378. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617693063
20.
FoleyA. E.HertsJ. B.BorgonoviF.GuerrieroS.LevineS. C.BeilockS. L. (2017). The math anxiety-performance link: A global phenomenon. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(1), 52–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721416672463
21.
GignacG. E.SzodoraiE. T. (2016). Effect size guidelines for individual differences researchers. Personality and Individual Differences, 102, 74–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.069
22.
HeineS. J.LehmanD. R.MarkusH. R.KitayamaS. (1999). Is there a universal need for positive self-regard?Psychological Review, 106(4), 766–794. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.106.4.766
23.
HembreeR. (1990). The nature, effects, and relief of mathematics anxiety. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21(1), 33–46. https://doi.org/10.2307/749455
24.
HopkoD. R.MahadevanR.BareR. L.HuntM. K. (2003). The abbreviated math anxiety scale (AMAS) construction, validity, and reliability. Assessment, 10(2), 178–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191103010002008
25.
HuL. T.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.
26.
HusseyI.HughesS. (2020). Hidden invalidity among 15 commonly used measures in social and personality psychology. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 3(2), 166–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245919882903
27.
KlineR. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.
LyonsI. M.BeilockS. L. (2012). Mathematics anxiety: Separating the math from the anxiety. Cerebral Cortex, 22(9), 2102–2110. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhr289
30.
MaloneyE. A.AnsariD.FugelsangJ. A. (2011). The effect of mathematics anxiety on the processing of numerical magnitude. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64(1), 10–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2010.533278
MarshH. W.HauK. T.WenZ. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11(3), 320–341. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2
33.
MeeceJ. L.WigfieldA.EcclesJ. S. (1990). Predictors of math anxiety and its influence on young adolescents’ course enrollment intentions and performance in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 60–70. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.60
34.
Perez-FelknerL.NixS.ThomasK. (2017). Gendered pathways: How mathematics ability beliefs shape secondary and postsecondary course and degree field choices. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(386), 386. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00386
35.
PlakeB. S.ParkerC. S. (1982). The development and validation of a revised version of the mathematics anxiety rating scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 42(2), 551–557. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316448204200218
36.
PletzerB.KronbichlerM.NuerkH.-C.KerschbaumH. H. (2015). Mathematics anxiety reduces default mode network deactivation in response to numerical tasks. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9(202), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00202
37.
PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B.LeeJ. Y.PodsakoffN. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
38.
PrimiC.BusdraghiC.TomasettoC.MorsanyiK.ChiesiF. (2014). Measuring math anxiety in Italian college and high school students: validity, reliability and gender invariance of the Abbreviated Math Anxiety Scale (AMAS). Learning and Individual Differences, 34, 51–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.05.012
PutnickD. L.BornsteinM. H. (2016). Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: The state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Developmental Review, 41, 71–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004
41.
R Core Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
42.
RamirezG.FriesL.GundersonE.SchaefferM. W.MaloneyE. A.BeilockS. L.LevineS. C. (2019). Reading anxiety: An early affective impediment to children’s success in reading. Journal of Cognition and Development, 20(1), 15–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2018.1526175
43.
RamirezG.GundersonE. A.LevineS. C.BeilockS. L. (2013). Math anxiety, working memory, and math achievement in early elementary school. Journal of Cognition and Development, 14(2), 187–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2012.664593
44.
RamirezG.ShawS. T.MaloneyE. A. (2018). Math anxiety: Past research, promising interventions, and a new interpretation framework. Educational Psychologist, 53(3), 145–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1447384
45.
RichardsonF.C.SuinnR. M. (1972). The mathematics anxiety rating scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 19(6), 551–554. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0033456
46.
RosseelY. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://www.jstatsoft.org/v48/i02/
47.
SarkarA.DowkerA.CohenK. R. (2014). Cognitive enhancement or cognitive cost: Trait-specific outcomes of brain stimulation in the case of mathematics anxiety. The Journal of Neuroscience, 34(50), 16605–16610. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.3129-14.2014
48.
SatorraA.BentlerP. M. (2010). Ensuring positiveness of the scaled difference chi square test statistic. Psychometrika, 75(2), 243–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11336-009-9135-Y
49.
SchillingerF. L.VogelS. E.DiedrichJ.GrabnerR. H. (2018). Math anxiety, intelligence, and performance in mathematics: Insights from the German adaptation of the Abbreviated Math Anxiety Scale (AMAS-G). Learning and Individual Differences, 61, 109–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.11.014
SpencerS. J.SteeleC. M.QuinnD. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(1), 4–28. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1998.1373
52.
SpruteL.BeilockS. (2016). Math anxiety in community college students. MathAMATYC Educator, 7(2), 39–45.
53.
SteigerJ. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25(2), 173–180. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4
54.
StoetG.BaileyD. H.MooreA. M.GearyD. C. (2016). Countries with higher levels of gender equality show larger national sex differences in mathematics anxiety and relatively lower parental mathematics valuation for girls. PLoS One, 11(4), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0153857
55.
TuckerL. R.LewisC. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291170
56.
VahediS.FarrokhiF. (2011). A confirmatory factor analysis of the structure of abbreviated math anxiety scale. Iranian Journal of Psychiatry, 6(2), 47–53.
57.
VandenbergR. J.LanceC. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810031002
58.
WuS.AminH.BarthM.MalcarneV.MenonV. (2012). Math anxiety in second and third graders and its relation to mathematics achievement. Frontiers in Psychology, 3(162), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00162
59.
YoungJ. R.YoungJ. L. (2016). Young, Black, and anxious: Describing the Black student mathematics anxiety research using confidence intervals. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 9(1), 79–93. https://doi.org/10.21423/jume-v9i1a275
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.
