Practical Implications of Test Anxiety Tools—Response

Abstract

Contrary to Lang and Lang's assertion that the performance of students lower in test anxiety was harmed by expressive writing, students with lower test anxiety performed just as well on their final exams in the writing and control conditions (Experiments 3 and 4 in our Report). Lang and Lang showed that having students imagine a person successful at solving scientific problems and write about the qualities of this person (i.e., priming competence) improved test performance of those higher in test anxiety, but harmed test performance of those lower in test anxiety ([ 1 ][1]). Although both our expressive writing and Lang and Lang's competence exercise are designed to enhance test performance, they are very different interventions. In expressive writing, students write about their feelings regarding the upcoming test. In the competence exercise, students write about the qualities of a successful test taker. In their study, task engagement explains the impact of the competence intervention on the test performance of students lower and higher in test anxiety. In contrast, we show that the extent to which one writes about negative thoughts and worries accounts for the benefits of expressive writing (our Experiment 2). ![Figure][2] CREDIT: ISTOCKPHOTO Given the different mechanisms, it is not surprising that the two interventions affect students with lower test anxiety differently. Whereas Lang and Lang's exercise primes competence and thus leads to less engagement for these students, our writing exercise need not relate to competence or engagement in this way. In support of this idea, in Experiment 1, we had some students expressively write before taking a low-pressure math test. If expressive writing primes competence, which in turn alters task engagement, then writing should hurt students' performance in a low-pressure situation. This is because students should approach a low-pressure test with high self-perceived competence (especially after succeeding on a similar pretest). Thus, priming competence further should lead to less effort and worse performance. However, we found that writing had no impact on low-pressure test performance. We suggest that writing allows students to express their negative thoughts and worries, which reduces the tendency to ruminate during the test. This expression is not necessary for those in a low-pressure situation or for students with lower test anxiety; thus, their performance is neither enhanced nor harmed by expressive writing. Lang and Lang do correctly point out that we do not provide direct evidence that expressive writing alleviated negative thoughts and worries during test performance. However, our intervention was guided by previous research showing that performance drops in high-pressure situations are accounted for by negative thoughts and worries ([ 2 ][3]) and that writing about worries alleviates the tendency to ruminate ([ 3 ][4]). If worries lead to poor test performance and writing helps alleviate these worries, then giving students the opportunity to express themselves should enhance test performance—especially for those highest in test anxiety. This is exactly what we found. Our evidence supports the counterintuitive idea that writing about worries benefits the performance of the most test-anxious students without compromising the performance of students lower in test anxiety. Thus, we see no need to screen people for test anxiety before they engage in expressive writing. 1. [↵][5] 1. J. W. B. Lang, 2. J. Lang , Psychol. Sci. 21, 811 (2010). [OpenUrl][6][Abstract/FREE Full Text][7] 2. [↵][8] 1. M. S. DeCaro, 2. K. E. Rotar, 3. M. S. Kendra, 4. S. L. Beilock , Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 63, 8 (2010). [OpenUrl][9] 3. [↵][10] 1. K. Klein, 2. A. Boals , J. Exp Psychol. Gen. 130, 3 (2001). [OpenUrl][11][CrossRef][12][PubMed][13][Web of Science][14] [1]: #ref-1 [2]: pending:yes [3]: #ref-2 [4]: #ref-3 [5]: #xref-ref-1-1 View reference 1 in text [6]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DPsychol.%2BSci.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1177%252F0956797610369492%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F20435953%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [7]: /lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NToic3Bwc3MiO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6ODoiMjEvNi84MTEiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czoyNDoiL3NjaS8zMzIvNjAzMS83OTIuMS5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30= [8]: #xref-ref-2-1 View reference 2 in text [9]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DQ.%2BJ.%2BExp.%2BPsychol.%26rft.volume%253D63%26rft.spage%253D8%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [10]: #xref-ref-3-1 View reference 3 in text [11]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DJournal%2Bof%2Bexperimental%2Bpsychology.%2BGeneral%26rft.stitle%253DJ%2BExp%2BPsychol%2BGen%26rft.aulast%253DLin%26rft.auinit1%253DE.%2BL.%26rft.volume%253D130%26rft.issue%253D1%26rft.spage%253D3%26rft.epage%253D28%26rft.atitle%253DThematic%2Brelations%2Bin%2Badults%2527%2Bconcepts.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1037%252F0096-3445.130.1.3%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F11293459%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [12]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1037/0096-3445.130.1.3&link_type=DOI [13]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=11293459&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fsci%2F332%2F6031%2F792.1.atom [14]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000170958800001&link_type=ISI