Abstract
The Metacognitions Questionnaire-30 (MCQ-30) measures maladaptive metacognitive beliefs considered central to the metacognitive model of psychopathology. However, the psychometric properties of the MCQ-30 in test anxiety (TA) among university students are unknown. This study examined the MCQ-30 factor structure and concurrent validity in both trait and state TA. Confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses support the previously established five-factor structure of the MCQ-30 in both state and trait TA, with factors having good internal consistency. Structural equation modeling of the relationships between MCQ-30 subscales and TA found ‘Negative beliefs about uncontrollability and danger of worry’ to have the strongest association. The MCQ-30 appears a robust measure of metacognitive beliefs in TA and provides a basis for further testing of the validity of the metacognitive model in TA. Extending the reach of metacognitive therapy, which is based upon the metacognitive model, to TA could help to improve both student wellbeing and academic performance.
Highlights
The Metacognitions Questionnaire-30 (MCQ-30) measures maladaptive metacognitive beliefs considered central to the metacognitive model of psychopathology
We examine factor structure and concurrent validity with both trait and state test anxiety (TA), to ensure the generalizability of findings and give confidence to researchers using the measure in different contexts
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) were conducted on the same ‘trait TA’ and ‘state TA’ datasets
Summary
The Metacognitions Questionnaire-30 (MCQ-30) measures maladaptive metacognitive beliefs considered central to the metacognitive model of psychopathology. Extending the reach of metacognitive therapy, which is based upon the metacognitive model, to TA could help to improve both student wellbeing and academic performance. Existing treatments for test-anxious university students achieve medium effect sizes compared to control conditions for reducing TA (g = −0.64) and only weak effects for improving academic performance (g = 0.28), when outliers are removed (Huntley et al 2019). Confidence in these findings was moderated by the lack of high quality trials and evidence of publication bias. The S-REF model proposes that emotional distress is caused by how people respond to negative thoughts
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
