The Development and Psychometric Assessment of a Scale to Measure the Severity of Examination Anxiety among Undergraduate University Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study reported here aimed to develop and psychometrically assess aninstrument to measure examination anxiety among undergraduate universitystudents. Based on empirical evidence and recent literature review wedeveloped a 1 2 item scale to measure the severity of examination anxiety. Theinstrument was administered to students, two weeks before they wrote theirexaminations. Experts (n=1 0) participated in a validation process of theinstrument before it was administered to students (n= 40). Internal consistencyreliability for the instrument was 0. 82 (Cronbach's alpha) and there was 92 %overall agreement between experts about the relevance of the instruments’items to measure students’ examination anxiety, providing evidence for contentvalidity. Factor analysis resulted in three cohesive and theoretically meaningfulfactors. There is evidence for content and convergent validity. The developedinstrument is a reliable, valid and empirical measure to assess the severity ofexamination anxiety. The scale will take five minutes to complete.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".