A Systematic Review of Reading Anxiety Literature

By Claire Greenlee, Master of Science

A Thesis Submitted in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements
For a Degree of
Specialist in School Psychology

Advisory Committee:

Sarah Conoyer, Ph. D, NCSP, Chair

Elizabeth McKinney, Ph. D., NCSP

Gregory Everett, Ph. D.

Graduate School
Southern Illinois University Edwardsville
May, 2023
 ABSTRACT

A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF READING ANXIETY LITERATURE

By

CLAIRE GREENLEE, M.S.

Chairperson: Sarah Conoyer, Ph. D., NCSP

Understanding how students feel about what they are learning can help educators adjust

interactions with students. Nationally, reading literacy scores are decreasing. Meanwhile, there

has been a push to help better students’ mental health, through programs such as social-

emotional learning. However, though there are great amounts of research dissecting the effects of

academic anxieties, there are still gaps that need to be inspected. Reading anxiety is not as well-

known, but has the potential to affect a student’s achievement. There is still much to be done in

the field of reading anxiety to understand the relationships between reading skills, the methods

used to assess reading anxiety, and the current understanding of the construct’s definition. A

structured literature review was used to examine the current breadth of reading anxiety research.

Twenty experimental studies between the years of 2005-2021 were reviewed to determine the

types of journals containing articles about reading anxiety, the demographics assessed, the

methodologies used, the reading skills assessed in comparison to reading anxiety, and the current

understanding of how the construct of reading anxiety is defined. The findings suggest that

additional research in this area need to widen the scope of research analyzed to better understand

the breadth and depth of literature. Additionally, the findings suggest gaps in current literature

regarding the ability to replicate and repeat studies.

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page #

ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………………………….. ii
LIST OF FIGURES …………………………………………………………………………....... v
LIST OF TABLES ……………………………………………………………………...…......... vi
CHAPTER 1 …………………………………………………………………………………….. 1
A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF READING ANXIETY LITERATURE ……………………… 1
Importance of Reading Skills for Life …………………………………………………... 1
Reading Skills …………………………………………………………………… 1
NAEP Scores ……………………………………………………………………. 3
Mental Health Impacting Skills …………………………………………………………. 4
Student Anxiety on School Performance ………………………………………... 4
Social-Emotional Learning in Schools ………………………………………….. 5
Effects of Internalizing Behaviors on Learning ……………………………………….... 6
Anxiety on School Performance ………………………………………………… 6
Motivation ………………………………………………………..…….. 7
Math Anxiety ……………………………………………………………………. 8
Definition and Math Achievement ……………………………….…....... 8
Research Scope ……………………………………………………… ...10
Interventions …………………………………………………………. ..11
Reading Anxiety ………………………………………………………...……... 13
Emerging Literacy Skills ………………………………………..…….. 14
Lack of Measurements …………………………………………..……. 15
Reading Anxiety Assessment …………………………………..……... 16
Skill Deficits are More at Risk for Internalizing Issues …………………….………... 18
Reciprocal Relationship …………………………………………………...….... 18
What Should We Focus On ………………………………………………….,… 19
CHAPTER 2 …………………………………………………………………………………… 22
METHODS ...…………………………………………………………………………………... 22
Interrater agreement and coding descriptors …………………………………………… 23

iii
CHAPTER 3 ….………………………………………………………………………………... 26
RESULTS ……………………………………………………………………………………… 26
Research Question 1 ……...…………………………………………………………..... 26
Research Question 2 …………………………………………………………………… 31
Research Question 3 …………………………………………………………………… 31
Research Question 4 ..………………………………………………………………….. 34
Research Question 5 …………………………………………………………………… 37
CHAPTER 4 ………………………………………………………...…………………………. 39
DISCUSSION ……………………………………………………………………...…………... 39
Area of Publication …………………………………………………………………….. 39
Demographics ……………………………………………………………………..…… 39
Methodology …………………………………………………………………………… 40
Reading Skills Assessed …………………………………………………………..…… 42
Construct Definition ……………………………………………………………………. 43
Limitations ……………………………………………………………………………... 44
Future Paths ……………………………………………………………………………. 45
Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………... 45
REFERENCES ………………………………………………………………………………… 47
APPENDICES ………………………………………………………………………………..... 54
A. SEARCH AND CODING INSTRUCTIONS ……………………………………………… 54
B. FULL ARTICLE CODING INSTRUCTIONS …………………………………………….. 55

iv
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Article Search and Study Inclusion in Systematic Review …………………………. 28

v
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Coding Descriptors and Definitions ………………………………………………….. 25

Table 2: Articles Included in the Systematic Review …………………………………………. 29

Table 3: Reading Anxiety Scales Included in the Systematic Review ………………………... 33

Table 4: Reading Skills versus Reading Anxiety Correlations …………………………...……. 35

Table 5: Reading Anxiety Definitions Provided in the Systematic Review …………...……… 38

vi
 CHAPTER 1

A Systematic Review of Reading Anxiety Literature

Reading anxiety is a relatively under-researched branch of academic anxiety. In fact,

there is no standardized definition or form of measurement on what reading anxiety is. Other

forms of academic anxiety, such as math anxiety, have been found to have significant effects on

a child’s school performance, motivation, and achievement. Is it the case that these academic

anxieties are affecting the skills, or are the skill deficits causing the academic anxieties?

Analyzing the current breadth of research on internalized behaviors, the understood definition of

what reading anxiety is, and the exact nature of the relationship between reading skill deficits

and reading anxiety could help researchers move forward in the research path by developing

measures and ultimately finding interventions to help assist students who struggle.

Importance of Reading Skills for Life

Reading is a skill developed in early elementary school that has lasting effects on a child

for the rest of their academic career, as well as their life past the educational system (Muter et al.,

2004). Starting at the 3rd grade, all subjects that children are beginning to learn about, such as

science and social studies, are taught by engaging the child in some form of reading. It is often

said that at the 3rd grade level children switch from learning to read to reading to learn (Pokharel,

2018). In this case, having developed reading skills is one of the larger deciding factors of a

child’s success in the classroom (Muter et al., 2004).

Reading Skills

Reading achievement is a much larger construct than meets the eye, as reading

development is broken down into reading skills like phonemic awareness and phonics, fluency,

vocabulary, and comprehension (National Reading Panel (NRP), 2000). All these skills are
 2

taught as a student develops within the academic system. Phonemic awareness is defined as a

student’s ability to focus on and manipulate phonemes in words they see. According to

Blachman (2000), students with weak phonological skills will likely become poor readers in the

future. On the other hand, phonics is the relationship between letter and letter combinations in

written and spoken language (NRP, 2000). While phonemic awareness and phonics are not the

same, they tend to overlap during instruction in the classroom. Once early readers learn

phonemic awareness and phonics, they can generalize these skills to other forms of decoding,

such as word part recognition, multisyllable decoding, and irregular word decoding.

Reading fluency is the ability to read orally with appropriate speed, while remaining

accurate and with proper expression (NRP, 2000). Fuchs and colleagues (2001) found that

reading fluency correlates highly with reading comprehension, thus making reading fluency and

building block of reading. It is often the case that students become more fluent the more they

read, which is why teachers often provide silent reading time in class (NRP, 2000). However, for

some students, reading fluency must develop with explicit instruction. Reading fluency

interventions play a major role in helping supplement reading fluency instruction to help develop

student skills. Vocabulary development is not only understanding the definition of the word, but

also how to use the word properly within written and oral language (Stahl, 2005). A student’s

vocabulary is often built through the words they hear and see daily, and promotion of reading

individual helps to build the student’s vocabulary. A developed vocabulary increases a student’s

comprehension (NRP, 2000). If a student is struggling in vocabulary development, they may be

able to maintain expected reading levels until words become more abstract, technical, or literary,

thus impacting comprehension beyond 4th grade, coined “the fourth-grade slump” (Chall et al.,

1990; Pokharel, 2018) Finding and understanding meaning from what a student reads, or reading
 3

comprehension, is the goal for reading development, and helps readers grow as they continue in

education (NRP, 2000). Students learn varying strategies to help them understand what they read

and require knowledge in previous reading skills to succeed (Tierney, 1982). Readers need

developed reading skills in all five areas to succeed in reading, as well as to succeed as students

once reading becomes necessary to learn (Pokharel, 2018).

NAEP Scores

The Institute for Educational Science (IES) and the National Center for Education

Statistics (NCES) conducts an annual assessment of the nation’s education progress. Donned the

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the assessment analyzes test scores from

state to state across a wide variety of subject matters to determine the country’s current

achievement (NAEP, 2022). These results inform decisions about the improvement of the

educational system in our country. Reported in the National Report Card, the levels at which our

students are reading can be assessed and analyzed across state, grade, demographics, and over

time. The NAEP Reading exam is provided to students at Grade 4, Grade 8, and Grade 12.

Average scale scores represent the NAEP reading scale, which ranges from 0 to 500, and

provides a composite of combined reading scales of reading literacy and informational reading.

For 4th graders, a score of about 208 represents a NAEP classification of Basic, a score above

238 represents a NAEP classification of Proficient, and a score above 268 represents a NAEP

classification of Advanced (U.S. Department of Education et al., 2019).

In 2019, the NAEP National Report Card reported the average scale score for 4th graders

on the reading assessment was 220 (NAEP, 2022). This is a 2-point decrease from the previous

Report Card in 2017, and a 4-point decrease from the Report Card in 2015. The average scaled

score from the years of 2000 to 2015 were steadily increasing (from a score of 213 to a score of
 4

223; NAEP, 2022). Scores have not only started to regress, but no score for 4th graders has

reached a level beyond basic. Across the nation, our fourth-grade readers, who at this point are

reading to learn, are not achieving proficient reading, which impacts their education. It is

important to address where this issue is coming from, and how educators can help intervene and

prevent these issues from further impacting a student’s ability to learn.

Mental Health Impacting Skills

Student Anxiety on School Performance

Anxiety has been shown to have effects on a child’s performance in both elementary and

secondary schooling. Specifically, a student’s anxiety, whether it be generalized anxiety,

academic anxiety, social anxiety, or a cluster of them all, can have significant repercussions on

their performance in the classroom (Carey et al., 2017). While all the clusters of anxiety have

similar foundation in their definitions, there are specific differences that change the settings in

which a student may see the effects of their anxieties. For example, testing anxiety refers

specifically to anxiety felt by students in or about evaluative settings (Brown et al., 2011). On the

other hand, general anxiety, as described by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental

Disorders – Fifth edition (DSM-5), refers to an individual’s tendency to feel anxious or uneasy

about everyday situations (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Anxiety could also be

classified as social anxiety, a different diagnosis in the DSM-5, that refers to an individual’s

tendency to feel anxious or uneasy specifically in social situation like having conversations,

interacting, or being around other people (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). While

varying forms of anxiety affect our students, school districts have placed a heavy emphasis on

intervening through universal supports that can help support and increase their students’ mental

health.
 5

Social-Emotional Learning in Schools

Social Emotional Learning (SEL) in schools was introduced into school curricula across

the country to combat some of the behavioral issues that educators were seeing in their buildings.

Focused more on the mental health side of education, SEL introduces and helps students acquire

knowledge, skills, and attitudes on a wide range of topics such as: identifying and managing

emotions, developing healthy identities, creating, and pursuing goals, learning about and

developing empathy, creating and maintaining healthy relationships, and making responsible

decisions. Not only are the students introduced to the topics, but they are also taught to apply

them in their own lives (Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL),

2022).

A meta-analysis conducted by Durlak and colleagues (2011) looked across 213 studies

involving more than 270,000 students and the effects that SEL provided. Researchers found that

across all the studies, students in SEL programs showed improved classroom behavior, better

attitudes about themselves, their peers, and school, and increased their abilities to handle the

stressors of academic life (Durlak et al., 2011). Similarly, students’ academic performance

increased by 11 percentile points if they were part of an SEL program, compared to students who

were not. SEL has also been found to increase well-being of students up to 18 years post-

graduation (Taylor et al., 2017). Using the findings of studies such as these, school districts

across the country have used their resources to implement SEL programs within their Tier 1

supports to help their student’s mental health (McCormac et al., 2019; Richard Albrecht et al.,

2019).
 6

Effects of Internalizing Behaviors on Learning

Anxiety on School Performance

In the perspective of anxiety’s effects on schooling performance, effects seen from all

forms of anxieties. The large pattern observed in the literature is that students with highest

performance in mathematics and reading had low anxiety profiles (Carey et al., 2017). Students

who had slight or moderate anxiety profiles follow the same trend in their performance scores.

The negative correlation between anxiety and academic performance highlights the importance

of looking at children’s anxiety profiles rather than just their academic anxiety, to understand

their school performance. However, it is important to note that negative correlations do not

describe the causation between the two constructs, rather just describe the present relationship.

In terms of early elementary students, separation anxiety and harm avoidance are the two

forms of anxiety that seem to have the largest impact on performance and predicted achievement

(Grills-Taquechel et al., 2013). Separation anxiety is defined as anxiety induced primarily by the

child being away from their primary care givers. Harm avoidance in this case is a child avoiding

situations and stimuli that could be perceived to cause them pain or discomfort. While these

forms of anxiety are to be expected in an early education setting, this period in a child’s life is

very important for their education. In this period, anxiety also parallels with inattention, because

high anxiety tends to lead an interference in students’ ability to complete tasks and concentrate.

There is a strong relationship between anxiety, inattention, and achievement (Massetti et al.,

2008). Specifically, inattention acts as a mediator between harm-avoidance anxiety and

achievement (Grills-Taquechel et al., 2013). Specifically, researchers found that greater harm

avoidance symptoms were associated with better end of the year attention. End of the year

attention was then, in turn, related to higher achievement scores. For these early elementary
 7

students, the inability to complete tasks and problems with concentration has the largest impact

on their achievement, and this could be caused by anxiety. Socioemotional variables, like the

different forms of anxiety, are incredibly important to consider when studying early elementary

achievement.

Motivation

Anxiety also plays a role in a child’s motivation to participate in the classroom. If a child

is not motivated to learn, they will not do well in school or in their general achievement (Sung et

al., 2016; Toste et al., 2020). Motivation can be broken into multiple facets: goal orientation,

beliefs, and disposition, which all further break down into other specifications (Toste et al.,

2020). Overall, the factors that can affect an individual’s motivation are rather subjective, but a

student’s beliefs and disposition about their own abilities have an impact on how to proceed with

the task at hand. For example, if a student has test anxiety, they are aware that they may not

perform well on tests. This belief about their ability acts as a dampener to their motivation,

which ultimately may end up in their low achievement in class. Similarly, if a child has anxiety

about their abilities in math or reading, this could decrease their motivation to participate in these

parts of class, lowering their achievement scores in both (Sung et al., 2016; Toste et al; 2020).

A phenomenon that could explain the relationship between motivation and anxiety is the

Yerkes – Dodson law. The Yerkes-Dodson law specifically looks at the relationship between

intrinsic motivation and task difficulty (Broadhurst, 1959; Dodson, 1915; Yerkes, 1909). In the

context of classroom anxiety, perceived difficulty of a task can be determined by the level of

anxiety that a child may or may not possess. As described by the law, tasks that are viewed as

easier take longer to learn as there is less pressure, and more difficult tasks are often learned in

shorter periods of time because the motivation is stronger (Broadhurst, 1959). In the context of a
 8

classroom setting, this means that anxiety can be used as a motivating factor, however, this

model does not necessarily explain what happens if the anxiety provoking stimulus is not

motivating to the student at hand, but rather hinders the student’s ability to produce work and

attend in the classroom.

Understanding how students feel in the classroom, about their work, or the subjects they

are learning can help educators adjust interactions with students to prevent serious effects of a

child’s anxiety. However, even though there is a great amount of research dissecting the effects

of differing classroom anxieties, there are still gaps that need to be inspected. These gaps can

include how the differing forms intersect and relate to each other, the dynamics of how anxieties

react to each other in applied settings, or how some of the anxieties can be assessed in a reliable

and valid way.

Math Anxiety

Math anxiety has been frequently investigated in the field of education. From

investigation of its cause (Ashcraft & Kirk, 2001), as well as its effects in classrooms (Barroso et

al., 2020), and possible interventions (Ramirez et al., 2018), the current span of research is wide -

sweeping. Math anxiety research originally developed out of experimentation and dissection of

testing anxiety (Hembree, 1990). From there it has been evolved into a well understood aspect of

some children’s educational experience and has led to the development of intervention and

prevention strategies to help negate some of the more detrimental effects that math anxiety has

on students.

Definition and Math Achievement

Some researchers classify math anxiety as a “subject-specific” test anxiety. Other

researchers describe math anxiety as a more general angst and feeling of overwhelm and dread
 9

when thinking about the subject broadly. However, for the terms of this paper, math anxiety is

the general fear and resulting avoidance of the subject of math and assessments of math

(Hembree, 1990). There is a high negative correlation between math enjoyment and level of

math anxiety (Hembree, 1990). In other words, children with low enjoyment of math are more

likely to have higher levels of math anxiety. Similarly, these students who have low enjoyment

of math also have a higher reported avoidance behavior, which is true of all individuals in all

circumstances.

Further research into the nature of math anxiety has found that there are some differences

of anxiety levels between different groups. For math enjoyment, there was a small correlation

between math anxiety and desire for success in the subject, which was more male-oriented in

nature. Similarly, there was a gender difference between males and females in secondary

educational settings, specifically that males with high math anxiety are more likely to avoid

mathematics classes (Hembree, 1990). While males are more likely to avoid the subject, females

are observed to have lower performance scores in the classes they take, due to math anxiety (Van

Mier et al., 2019). In the college setting and into adulthood, the correlation becomes more female

oriented in nature, in which females avoid the subject and males are observed to have the lower

performance scores (Hembree, 1990; Van Mier et al., 2019). Racial differences in math anxiety

have been researched to some extent, however, the data is not reliable enough to make large

conclusions on the nature of any differences among racial/ethnic groups.

The causes of math anxiety itself are relatively unknown, but there are some strong

theories that help explain some of the major impacts that math anxiety causes. Specifically,

students with heightened math anxiety have been found to demonstrate significantly limited

working memories (Ashcraft & Kirk, 2001). Most differences in a child’s math performance as a
 10

function of their working memory are not as present with basic whole number facts and simple

addition and multiplication. Rather, the presented issues are seen when testing more difficult

arithmetic problems, such as carrying operations (Faust et al., 1996), transformation operations

like the alphabet arithmetic task (Logan & Klapp, 1991), or mixed fraction and complex

subtraction (Ashcraft & Kirk, 1998). Math anxiety also has been found to increase a student’s

reaction time to complete mathematical tasks, as well as decreasing their capacity to complete

mental math without making errors. All these features of math anxiety have been attributed to a

disruption in the central executive processing (Ashcraft & Kirk, 2001). This component is the

area of the brain that implements the procedures to complete various mathematical tasks. Just as

importantly, this area of the brain also contains the component of the mind in which intrusive

thoughts are created and attended to, as well as worry and other anxieties (Ashcraft & Kirk,

2001).

Research Scope

Due to math anxiety originally being connected to testing anxiety, the research that

evaluates the relationships between anxiety and achievement is well-rounded. The research itself

is important to understand, especially for teachers, because math anxiety and math achievement

are important items that correlate with a child’s future career and educational outcomes

(Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). Similarly, a child’s ability to complete math courses with average

achievement can affect the ways in which they choose their career and college choices,

specifically avoiding or going to careers in the STEM path (Lauermann et al., 2015). As

previously mentioned, there are gender differences in math anxiety, however, there is not a clear

pattern that dictates the differences in gender for math achievement. Depending on the age,

measure, and ability level of the sample, researchers have found that both boys and girls have
 11

lower levels of achievement (Cimpian et al., 2016; Van Mier et al, 2019; Voyer & Voyer, 2014).

Similarly, little differences were found between racial groups in math anxiety, however small

differences with specific samples found that African American students had lower achievement

scores (Sonnenschein & Galindo, 2015). However, it should be noted that the difference in

achievement could be caused by economic status and other external factors, rather than math

anxiety (Sonnenschein & Galindo, 2015).

A meta-analysis has found small to moderate statistically significant negative correlations

between math anxiety and math achievement in the classroom for students in all grade levels

(Barroso et al., 2021). Specifically, the meta-analysis found that this relation between anxiety

and achievement begins in childhood and remains significant throughout adulthood. This pattern,

which supports previous patterns found, is evident across all forms of math (Barroso et al.,

2021). Also, the relation between math achievement and math anxiety is stronger in samples that

were not labeled as low math ability comparative to the samples that were labeled as low math

ability based off the researchers coding. This finding goes against the current research in the field

that suggested that low math ability samples have a stronger correlation between math anxiety

and math achievement (Barroso et al., 2021). Overall, meta-analyses like this are helpful in

determining the status and scope of research.

Interventions

Because the correlation between math anxiety and math achievement is well-established,

there is cause to look for ways to help students perform the best they can in mathematics,

especially if they demonstrate math anxiety. Math skill interventions that are often implemented

in classrooms have been found to benefit those suffering with math anxiety. Similarly, the

interpretation of the child’s anxiety in terms of physiological arousal and mindset is also a very
 12

important step for intervention, and, ultimately, prevention (Ramirez et al., 2018). In other

words, it is important for educators to evaluate why that child specifically may be experiencing

anxiety. This then helps educators tailor intervention models made best to fit specifically for

each child. This process in the context of math anxiety is called an Interpretation Account

(Ramirez et al., 2018). Interpretation Account helps educators within the context of dealing with

findings that contradict the literature, such as having students who are high achieving yet

struggle with high math anxiety. A simple way to conceptualize how an Interpretation Account

functions in a classroom is that it helps educators understand that math anxiety does not come

from a student’s lack of understanding, avoidance, or performance worries, but rather how each

student interprets and understands their own experience with math (Ramirez et al., 2018).

Math skill and exposure interventions are some of the most common forms of math

anxiety interventions provided in school districts. Like other phobia interventions, exposure

interventions for math anxiety let students get gradual experience and exposure with tasks that

increase in their anxiety-inducing nature (Ramirez et al., 2018). The goal of such an intervention

is to allow students to get used to a level of anxiety inducing stimuli so that they can complete

the task at a functional level. Findings from studies investigating the effectiveness of the

exposure interventions found that improving math skills is important to reducing math anxiety,

and desensitizing them to the subject (Ramirez et al., 2018). Another common intervention that

has been found to be effective in reducing students’ math anxiety is narrative and mind-set

interventions, in which a student is able to make sense of their experiences with the math tasks

they are being given. In a study by Dweck (1975), this intervention was beneficial for students

who have learned helplessness, specifically with helping them perform better in math. In the

terms of this experiment, participants worked one-on-one with experimenters for pre-, mid-, and
 13

post-training on math problems, as well as live feedback in the form of lights, with an imbedded

token system. When participants had a positive mindset (lights turning on when the answered a

problem correct) compared to those who did not (no lights turning on even if they get answers

correct) math anxiety levels were much lower, and their performance scores were higher

(Dweck, 1975). Ramirez and colleagues (2018) also discussed interventions as simple as

introducing children to number rich board games (Laski & Siegler, 2014), as well as cognitive

tutoring programs that help expose students to math skills and concepts (Supekar et al., 2015).

The tutoring program follows the same steps as a phobia intervention in exposure therapy.

Ultimately researchers found that after the tutoring program, students had reduced amygdala

reactivity in response to math (Supekar et al., 2015).

In general, there are many promising studies that analyze a multitude of interventions that

help students who are struggling with math anxiety. Compared to other forms of academic

anxieties, math anxiety is well-known, which means there has been much more research and

evaluation of interventions conducted. Reading anxiety, on the other hand, is not as recognized

or explored as its counterpart.

Reading Anxiety

Reading anxiety, like math anxiety, has potential to affect a student’s achievement. While

reading anxiety is not as established as math anxiety, there are still large impacts on a child’s

success in the classroom, especially if a child’s reading comprehension and fluency are affected

due to a form of academic anxiety (Ramierez et al., 2019). While reading interventions in general

are much more developed than math skill interventions, reading anxiety specifically does not

seem to have as many developed interventions. To develop effective interventions to help

 14

students who are struggling, it is important to understand the intricacies of reading anxiety that

are currently relatively unknown.

Emerging Literacy Skills

The period of emerging literacy skills is important in a child’s education and involves

many cognitive abilities. Early reading proficiency is essential in a young reader’s academic

success later in their life (Duncan et al., 2007). Young readers who are successful during their

years of reading acquisition are more likely to be engaged in school (McGee et al., 2002) and to

attend college (Zaff et al., 2002). As children begin the journey of developing reading skills in

their early educational experiences, it becomes apparent that not all children are successful right

away. This delay can be natural, however, impediments, such as reading anxiety, could have

lasting effects on a child’s self-concept as a reader which follows them throughout their

experiences in an academic setting (Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2013; Katzir et al., 2018;

McGee et al., 2002). It is also important to look at which skills a student is struggling in, as this

has large impacts on further reading skill developments, especially in early skill development

like phonics and phonemic awareness (NRP, 2000).

While many studies that assess reading look at associated linguistic and cognitive

factors, looking at the mechanics of how one reads, Katzir and colleagues (2018) looked at

affective factors in reading, such as reading anxiety and self-perceptions. In a population of

Hebrew speaking second graders, researchers measured emergent literacy skills, as well as

reading accuracy and rate, and compared these measures to self-concept and reading anxiety. In

this case, emergent literacy skills are defined as working memory, phonological fluency, and

rapid automatized naming. There was a moderate negative correlation between reading anxiety

and reader’s self-concept among the second graders, which means that children who present with
 15

a lower sense of competence in reading are often those that are afraid to read and may ultimately

develop an avoidance towards reading throughout the rest of their academic career (Katzir, et al.,

2018). Additionally, researchers found that reading rate was the strongest single predictor of a

child’s self-concept and reading anxiety. Specifically, a child’s reading rate serves as a way for

them to self-appraise their own reading skills, which in turn influences their self-concept as a

reader, and their reading anxiety. This finding was found through the implementation of various

scales looking at a child’s self-concept of their own reading (Katzir, et al., 2018). This study

highlights the call to action that is addressing the issues of reading anxiety at an early age, when

children are developing as readers, so that the impacts of these feelings are diminished overtime.

Other preliminarily research looking at a child’s reading acquisition period has shown

that there is a strong relationship between reading anxiety and reading achievement (Ramirez et

al., 2019). Researchers looked at yearlong achievement for first and second graders in both

reading and math, as well as measures of reading anxiety and positive reading affect.

Researchers found a strong bidirectional relationship between reading anxiety and reading

achievement. More specifically, they found that the reading anxiety in a fall semester would

predict the reading achievement the following spring (Ramirez et al., 2019). This initial research

follows the same pattern found with math anxiety research, achievement shares a strong

relationship with negative affect towards reading, rather than a positive affect towards reading.

Lack of Measurement

Because reading anxiety is not as prominent in school psychology literature and primarily

studying ESL populations, there are not very many resources that measure student’s reading

anxiety in general. Often, researchers use measures that assess math anxiety and adjust them,

such that a measurement of reading anxiety can be found (Katzir et al., 2018). While this tactic is
 16

useful in the moment, a more reliable measure is needed for a generalized use of the data to helps

lead to support for children struggling with reading anxiety.

Another way in which reading anxiety has been measured is by looking at reader self-

perception and language motivation. In a study conducted by Alkhateeb and colleagues (2014),

self-perception and language motivation were used to measure and understand reading anxiety in

Arab American students learning Arabic as a second language. Researchers used an Arabic

Language Reading Anxiety Measure (adapted from Saito et al., 1999), which assessed students’

levels of general anxiety as well as their self-concept as Arabic speakers and compared this

measure with academic grades. Researchers found that reading anxiety was significantly

correlated with reader self-perception (Alkhateeb et al., 2014), outlining the trend found in later

research (Katzir et al., 2018; Ramirez et al., 2019). Researchers in the 2014 study also found that

there was a positive correlation between language motivation and readers’ self-perception, which

ultimately correlated with reading anxiety. While there are a few studies that have used measures

specifically looking at reading anxiety, many are adapted. This can call the reliability of these

studies into question and highlight the lack of a representative demographic for the American

education system.

Reading Anxiety Assessment

Reading anxiety can be assessed using reading comprehension and reading fluency tasks,

so an array of assessment batteries can be used to determine a child’s current levels of reading

skills, while also being able to compare it to levels of anxiety, creating a reading anxiety

measure. In a study conducted by Grills and colleagues (2014), anxiety was assessed as a

possible influence on a child’s response to intervention for reading difficulties. Within a multi-

tiered reading intervention, researchers examined anxiety symptoms and compared that to
 17

success in response to that intervention, as measured by comprehension and fluency tasks

determined by reading screeners and progress monitoring. In general, researchers found that,

while anxiety tended to decrease over the course of the year it was monitored, anxiety scores for

first graders who showed lower achievement were higher than those who had higher

achievement, showing that anxiety plays a part in motivation to achieve (Grills et al., 2014).

Essentially, anxiety paired with low achievement (an assumed reading anxiety) is correlated with

a lower motivation to achieve, which is an overall issue for the kids who experience some form

of reading anxiety. While this study does not have a direct measure for reading anxiety itself, it

lays a foundation for how reading anxiety could be assessed, due to the lack of batteries that

actively assess reading anxiety.

While reading achievement measures are a great way in which reading anxiety can be

assessed, there needs to be a measurement for individuals who do not fit the norms for standard

achievement batteries. Some populations of students do not use spoken language, particularly

those who are affected by hearing or speech difficulties, individuals with selective mutism, as

well as individuals with intellectual or developmental delays and disorders. Particularly for

students who fall in the category of ability to process written language but an inability to speak,

the test of silent reading efficiency and comprehension is useful (Wagner et al., 2010). This

assessment is also used for general populations of students as well, as it tests a student’s ability

to read to themselves. When assessing reading anxiety, this battery could be used in comparison

to a general reading assessment battery to see a possible difference in scores. This difference, of

course, could be caused by a reading anxiety, particularly that of reading aloud.

Some recent studies have looked more at measuring reading anxiety specifically in the

college student population. Researchers created a brief reliable scale through internal consistency
 18

measures and confirmatory factor analysis to measure reading anxiety that specifically looked at

the effects of this type of anxiety on college students (Edwards et al., 2022). They found that

reading anxiety was in fact related to many factors in reading achievement like fluency, self-

concept, self-perception in comparison to others, frequency of reading for pleasure, and overall

reading enjoyment. Researchers also found that reading anxiety was separate from general and

social anxiety using the RACS (Reading Anxiety in College Students), which supports the need

for interventions made specifically for reading anxiety (Edwards et al., 2022).

Similarly, new research in the last year has found a promising research model to look at

the effects of reading anxiety on children. In early 2021, Macdonald and colleagues looked

directly at the effects of reading anxiety on 4th and 5th graders’ reading comprehension using

measures like silent word reading and reading fluency, as well as generalized anxiety

(Macdonald, et al., 2021). Like Edwards and colleagues (2022), this study also found a

correlation between reading anxiety and general anxiety but found differences when comparing

reading anxiety to reading. In general, there are limits to the ways in which educators and

researchers can assess reading anxiety. Particularly, there is a large gap in the research on

reading anxiety measurements, as well as ways in which reading anxiety could be measured. The

correlations found between reading anxiety and reading achievement is a promising path that

only few have explored.

Skill Deficits are More at Risk for Internalizing Issues

Reciprocal Relationship

Researchers are still relatively unclear the exact relationship between reading and

anxiety. Like the chicken and the egg, it is unclear whether the struggle with reading causes

anxiety, or if anxiety causes the struggle with reading. Further, it is unclear if they are a singular
 19

event entirely, labeled as “reading anxiety”. A meta-analysis conducted by Francis and

colleagues (2019) found that there is a strong association between poor reading skills and

internalizing problems. Specifically, they found that students with poor reading skills are at a

moderate risk for experiencing internalizing problems, such as anxiety or depression, but are at

an even greater risk for anxiety (Francis et al., 2019). Since there has been a relationship

established, researchers have started looking directly for interventions that target Poor Readers

with Anxiety (PRAX). A PRAX intervention was piloted with 3rd – 7th graders for 12 weeks to

help struggling readers (Francis et al., 2021). In introduction of the PRAX intervention found

increased reading and spelling accuracy, as well as decreased anxiety symptoms. Researchers

concluded that this PRAX intervention should move to more randomized controlled trials to

further support its validity and reliability. There seems to be an established relationship between

reading and anxiety in some form, which has led to researchers looking directly at interventions

that target both. However, the directionality of the relationship is still unclear, so the direct focus

on both reading and anxiety together could be avoiding the original problem of declining reading

skills all together.

What Should We Focus On?

As reported by the National Report Card (NAEP, 2022), there are declining reading

abilities, on average, for fourth graders across the nation. These reading skills are only classified

as “basic.” Nationally, states are requiring their school districts to provide academic supports

through options like Response to Intervention (RtI) (Zirkel, 2011). These programs provided

tiered academic support for students flagged to be “at-risk.” So, there are systems in place to help

address these declining reading scores. However, there is also currently a national push for

Social-Emotional learning, providing students with more mental health supports. At this point in
 20

time in academics, these two realms, skill deficits and mental health issues, are often merging.

Research is focusing on academic anxieties such as test anxiety, math anxiety, and reading

anxiety. Skill deficits are either attributed to or they are seen as equals to internalizing behaviors.

However, if the goal for our students is ultimately academic outcomes, there may be

interventions focused on the academic skill deficits, but there may also need to be those

addressing academic anxieties. To investigate the relationship between reading anxiety and

reading achievement in school children, there needs to be a common definition of what reading

anxiety is, and a way to identify the students that struggle with poor reading and demonstrate

anxiety symptoms. At this point, it is unclear what the definition of reading anxiety is as a

concept. For example, is it a skill deficit created by anxiety? Is it anxiety created by a skill

deficit? Is it both? These questions lead to limitations in measuring this concept, if we do not

know what we are measuring. Similarly, what types of interventions are our students currently

receiving? Are they effective for addressing the actual reading problem our nation has?

There are limited ways in which reading anxiety has been assessed, and these measures

do not have the same level of reliability and validity as measurements of math anxiety. Similarly,

there is a limited diversity in the samples that have been used to assess reading anxiety. Many of

the studies have been conducted in other countries and assess students learning a second

language, rather than those that are reading in their native language. The gap in research

assessing reading anxiety creates the need for future research that investigates the relationships

between reading anxiety and achievement in a comprehensive manner.

Literature around investigations of reading anxiety needs to be evaluated overall, with the

goal to find a common definition of what reading anxiety is, and if measures and interventions to

assist students are necessary. A systematic review would be a first step to examine the
 21

demographics of students studied, where the literature is located (i.e. journals/psychology

specialist areas), any similarities and differences in the research, how reading anxiety is being

measured, general methodological rigor of studies, and if reading skills are also being assessed.

The purpose of the current study is to conduct a systematic review of the current state of reading

anxiety research to determine if a common definition can be created and ultimately the future

path of the research. The following research questions will guide the search:

1. Which journals are reading anxiety studies published in?

2. Which populations are commonly used in anxiety research?

3. What methods are being used to assess reading anxiety?

4. Are reading skills being considered in the current reading anxiety literature?

5. What are the common definitions of reading anxiety in the current literature?
 22

CHAPTER 2

Methods

Following the procedures outlined by the What Works Clearinghouse’s (WWC)

Procedures and Standards Handbook (2022), a structure for reviewing and identifying relevant

literature was created for the current study. First, a series of terms were used by each data

collector independently while reviewing the electronic databases, PsychInfo and ERIC, from the

years of 2005-2021 to find reading anxiety articles published in school/educational psychology.

Search terms developed by researchers included: “Academic Anxiety” AND “Reading”,

“Anxiety” AND “Reading Difficulties”, “Anxiety” AND “Reading Skills”, “Anxiety Towards

Reading”, “Reading Anxiety”, “Anxiety” AND “Reading Fluency”, “Anxiety” AND “Reading

Comprehension”, and “Reading Anxiety Scale.” A total of 503 articles were found across the

two data bases.

Next, repeated articles (the same article appearing across multiple search terms or

databases) in the search were eliminated, leaving 293 articles. Then the abstracts were reviewed

to ensure that studies are related to reading anxiety. Articles that are not related were removed

from the list (266 articles). Next, each article identified by the search was reviewed based on the

following inclusionary/exclusionary criteria:

(1) Participants were reported to be in kindergarten to twelfth grade.

(2) Article was a peer reviewed journal.

(3) Article discusses reading anxiety as a construct in their study.

(4) Article measures reading anxiety with a scale.

 23

Interrater agreement and coding descriptors

Articles were initially assessed by the principal investigator and a graduate assistant, each

taking on one of the databases. Articles were also assessed secondarily by two undergraduate

coders. An initial search procedure sheet was uploaded to Qualtrics for data keeping purposes. A

coding manual was developed by the principal investigator, which was based on the exclusionary

and inclusionary criteria developed for the literature review. The initial coding manual is

attached in Appendix A. Interrater agreement across the coding pairs and all four coders was

determined by percentage agreement on the inclusionary criteria across the articles initial coding.

After the first round of article search coding the first coding pair had an interrater agreement

resulting in 78% agreement, the second coding pair had an interrater agreement resulting in 62%

agreement, and across all four coders there was interrater agreement resulting in 51% agreement.

The coders reconvened to discuss any confusion or disagreements in the coding before recoding

any errors in a second round of initial coding. After the second round of article search coding,

the first coding pair had an interrater agreement of 94% agreement, the second coding pair had

an interrater agreement of 88%, and across all four coders there was an interrater agreement of

88%. As a result of strong interrater agreement, 27 articles were identified to go through the next

round of the coding process.

Next, each article was read and coded using a coding sheet uploaded to Qualtrics for data

keeping purposes. An additional coding manual was developed by the principal investigator,

adapted from the What Working Clearing House Procedures Handbook (2022), which is attached

in Appendix B. Each article was coded for demographic information, which area of literature the

article was pulled from, reading skills being analyzed, how reading anxiety was measured, how it

was defined, and the general findings. For coding inter-rater agreement, the principal investigator
 24

served as primary coder, with the supervising faculty chair as the secondary coder. The initial

interrater reliability agreement was 89%. Discrepancies between raters were discussed, and raters

recoded all articles independently a second time, which produced an interrater reliability

agreement of 100%. The codes are listed out in Table 1.

 25

Table 1.

Coding Descriptors and Definitions

Descriptor Definition
Article Information
Author and Year Last name of first author and year of publication (for identification purposes)
Article Title Title of Article (for identification purposes)
Journal Title Journal Title study was published in
Area of Publication Area/topic in which the article is published (whether cognitive, education,
school psychology, or other)
Participants
Number of students Sample size included in the study
Grade Grade of participants included in the study
English Language Indication of whether the participants are learning English as a first
Learners language, English as a second language, or another language as a second
language
Risk Status Indication of whether the participants had any traits labeled as risk in terms
of comparative variables (whether IEP eligibility, flagged reading risk, or
other)
Study Structure What type of study was used (i.e., single-subject design, group comparison,
scale development, or correlational)
Methodology
Reading Skills What reading skills are being measured (i.e. fluency, phonics, vocabulary,
and comprehension)
Reading Anxiety What scale is being used to measure reading anxiety
Measure
Findings
Definition How did authors define the construct of “reading anxiety,” if at all
Criterion Measure What variables were reading anxiety compared to
Correlations What was the correlation between reading anxiety and reading achievement,
if applicable.
Reliability What type of reliability measure did researchers have for their reading
anxiety scales
 26

CHAPTER 3

Results

Twenty-seven articles were identified to go through the final round of the coding process.

Seven of those articles were excluded from the final coding due to not meeting the inclusionary

criteria. Three articles were eliminated for reasons outside of the inclusion/exclusionary criteria

(See Figure 1). Escolar-Llamazares & Srrano-Pintado (2019), for example, was excluded

because there was not an English translation. An article by Piccolo and colleagues (2020) was

excluded because of an error correction made in a later article (Piccolo et al., 2021). The article

by Piccolo and colleagues (2017) was a conceptual study, and thus, excluded from the study. A

total of twenty articles were included in the final analysis (See Table 2). Overall, frequency t

counts were used and translated into percentages to answer each research question, apart from

reviewing definitions which reviewed general themes across articles.

Research Question 1

Within the literature, 55% of the articles were located in journals focused on education,

while 25% were found in general psychology journals. Two articles (10%) were located in

language focused journals, while 5% were in cognitive psychology journals and social

psychology journals, respectively. Of the twenty articles, four were published in Frontiers in

Psychology, while the other 16 were published in: Computers & Education, English Language

Teaching, Estudos de Psicologia, Foreign Language Annals, Interactive Learning Studies,

International Education Studies, International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,

International Journal of Higher Education, International Linguistics Research, Journal of

Educational Issues, Journal of Cognition and Development, Psychological Reports:

 27

Sociocultural Issues in Psychology, Reading and Writing Quarterly, Reading Psychology,

Reading Research Quarterly, and The Modern Language Journal.

 28

Figure 1.

Article Search and Study Inclusion in the Systematic Review

Records identified through

database searching
(n = 503)

Records after duplicates removed

(n = 293)

Records screened Records excluded

(n =293) (n = 266)

Additional
records
Full-text articles assessed 7 full-text articles excluded,
identified
for eligibility • Participants were not K-12
through
(n = 27) (n = 4)
sources from
initial search • Article did not have an
(n = 2) English translation (n=1)
• Article was corrected later
(n=1)
Studies included in • Article was conceptual
final review and did not measure a
(n = 20) sample (n=1)
 29

Table 2.

Articles Included in the Systematic Review

Area of Methods
Study n Grade ELS Design Reading Skills Scale Used Definition
Research Included
Par, Mat, Pro,
Alkhateeb 2014 Social 118 7,8 Arabic as 2nd Corr. Pho, Voc Adapted -
DA
English as
Awada 2018 Education 50 9 GC Par, Pro, DA Comp RAS 1 -
2nd
English as
Chen 2016 Education 88 7 GC Par, Mat, Pro Comp FLRAS -
2nd
English as
Chow 2017 Education 48 1 Corr. Par, Mat, Pro Voc FLRAS Yes
2nd
Dong 2019 General Psych 151 4 - GC Par, Mat, Pro Comp CLRAS Yes
Estrada- English as Par, Mat, Pro,
Education 163 11 Corr. Flu Adapted Yes
Madronero 2019 2nd DA
Gencer 2019 Education 598 5,6,7,8 - Corr. Par, Mat, DA No RAS-PSSS -
English as
Ismail 2015 Education 72 11 GC Par, Pro, DA No Developed Yes
2nd
Par, Mat, Pro,
Katzir 2018 General Psych 115 2 - Corr. Pho, Flu Adapted Yes
DA
Par, Mat, Pro,
Kilinc 2016 Education 512 5,6,7,8 - Corr. No RAS 2 Yes
DA
English as
Macdonald 2021 Education 272 4,5 Corr. Par, Mat, DA Pho, Flu, Comp RAQ -
2nd
Par, Mat, Pro,
Piccolo 2021 General Psych 120 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 - SD Pho, Flu Adapted Yes
DA
Pollack 2021 General Psych 146 3,4,5,6,7 - Corr. Par, Mat, DA Pho, Flu Adapted Yes
Ramirez 2019 Cognitive 607 1,2 - Corr. Par, Mat, Pro Pho Adapted Yes
Spanish as Par, Mat, Pro, Pho, Flu, Voc,
Sparks 2018* Language 266 9,10,11,12 Corr. FLRAS Yes
2nd DA Comp
 30

Area of Methods
Study n Grade ELS Design Reading Skills Scale Used Definition
Research Included
Spanish as Par, Mat, Pro, Pho, Flu, Voc,
Sparks 2018* Language 307 9,10,11 Corr. FLRAS Yes
2nd DA Comp
Taboada Barber English as Par, Mat, Pro,
Education 517 3,4,5 GC Pho, Comp Adapted Yes
2021 2nd DA
Tonka 2020 Education 358 5,6,7,8 - Corr. Mat, Pro, DA No RAS-PSSS -
Vanbecelaera Par, Mat, Pro,
Education 336 1 - GC Pho, Flu Adapted -
2020 DA
Zhang 2018 General Psych 116 3 - Corr. Par, Mat, Pro Comp Developed -

Note: ELL = English Learner Status, Corr = Correlational, GC = Group Comparison, SD = Scale Development, Par = Participants,
Mat = Materials, Pro = Procedure, DA = Data Analysis, Pho = Phonics, Flu = Fluency, Voc = Vocabulary, Comp = Comprehension,
RAS 1 = Reading Anxiety Scale (Young, 1999), FLRAS = Foreign Language Reading Anxiety Scale (Saito, Horwitz, & Garza,1999),
CLRAS = Chinese Language Reading Anxiety Scale (Zhao 2013), RAS-PSSS = Reading Anxiety Scale for Primary and Secondary
School Students (Celikturk & Yamac, 2015), RAS 2 = Reading Anxiety Scale (Melanlioglu, 2014), RAQ = Reading Anxiety
Questionnaire (RAQ; Grills, unpublished)
* Data set used with different research questions
 31

Research Question 2

To assess the populations used to conduct reading anxiety research, the samples from the

literature were analyzed across the studies. Specifically, articles were coded based on grade

level, English language learning status, and risk status. When looking at the grade levels assessed

by the articles, fifth and seventh graders were sampled most often (35%). Additionally, fourth,

sixth, and eighth graders were sampled across the articles 25% of the time. Twenty percent of the

articles sampled third, ninth, or eleventh graders, while first and second graders were sampled

15% of the time. Tenth graders were sampled 10% of the time, and twelfth graders were sampled

5% of the time.

Fifty percent of the articles did not assess or report language learning status, or the extent

to which they sampled English speaking students. Further, some articles reported assessing

samples learning Arabic (5%), English (35%), and Spanish (10%) as a second language. Per risk

status, 55% of the analyzed articles did not report assessing any type of risk status. Risk statuses

such as socio-economic status (30%), dual language learner status (10%), SLD diagnosis (10%),

other IEP eligibility (5%), and flagged reading risk (5%) were reported across the 20 assessed

articles. Ramirez, et al. (2019) specifically reported that they only sampled general education

students and excluded any students with an IEP. They did not note assessing any other risk

status.

Research Question 3

When examining the types of research designs employed by reading anxiety articles,

most of the studies assessed were correlational in design (65%). Thirty percent used a group

comparison design, while only one article used a scale development design (Piccolo et al., 2021).

To assess the rigor of the methodology sections across the analyzed studies, the frequency of
 32

specific methodology sections included were calculated. Articles were coded based on the

presence of participants, materials, procedure, and data analysis sections. If the article did not

have the section specifically reported in the Methods section, it was not coded. Of the twenty

articles, on 75% included a data analysis section, 85% included a procedure section, 90%

included a materials section, and 95% included a participant’s section. In all, only 9 articles out

of 20 included all four distinct parts of the methods section. Additionally, articles were assessed

according to whether the materials (i.e., scale items) used were attached somewhere in the

article. Only 35% of the articles included the reading anxiety scales used in their methods and

reported in the materials section in the appendices.

Additionally, the types of reading anxiety scales that were used in the reviewed articles

was also examined. A list of the scales used by the articles are listed in Table 3. Of the twenty

articles, 50% used previously established reading anxiety scales. Forty percent adapted the scale

used from a previously established reading anxiety scale, while 10% of studies developed their

own scale. Nineteen of the twenty articles provided reliability statistics for the scales via

Cronbach’s Alphas (ranging α = .61 through α = .95). The one exception of this was Taboada

Barber and colleagues (2021), who used an adapted reading anxiety scale of six items and used

McDonald’s omega for their reliability statistic.

 33

Table 3.

Reading Anxiety Scales Included in the Systematic Review

Reliability
Study Scale Used
Alpha’s
Alkhateeb
Arabic Reading Anxiety Scale (adapted from Saito, et al., 1999) α = .85
2014
Awada 2018 Reading Anxiety Scale (Young, 1999) α = .61
Foreign-Language Reading Anxiety Scale (FLRAS; Saito, Horwitz, &
Chen 2016 α = .85
Garza,1999)
Chow 2017 Foreign-Language Reading Anxiety Scale (FLRAS; Saito et al.,1999) α = .91
Dong 2019 Chinese Language Reading Anxiety Scale (Zhao 2013) α = .90
Estrada-
Madronero Reading Anxiety Questionnaire (adapted from Saito et al., 1999) -
2019
Reading Anxiety Scale for Primary and Secondary School Students
Gencer 2019 α = .95
(Celikturk & Yamac, 2015)
Ismail 2015 Researcher developed questionnaire α = .91
Adapted Reading Anxiety Scale (adapted from Abbreviated Math
Katzir 2018 α = .83
Anxiety Scale by Hopko et al., 2003)
Kilinc 2016 Reading Anxiety Scale (Melanlioglu, 2014) α = .87
Macdonald
Reading Anxiety Questionnaire (RAQ; Grills, unpublished). α = .77
2021
Reading Anxiety Scale – Short Version for Brazilian Portuguese
Piccolo 2021 (adapted from Reading Anxiety Scale by Zbornik, 1998; Zbornik & α = .86
Wallbrown, 1991)
Reading Anxiety Scale for Young Children (adapted from Math
Pollack 2021 α = .84
Anxiety Scale for Young Children by McGraw, 2016)
Ramirez Reading Anxiety Scale (adapted from Math Anxiety Rating Scale by
α = .86
2019 Ramirez, Gunderson, Levine, and Beilock, 2013)
Sparks
Foreign Language Reading Anxiety Scale (FLRAS; Saito et al.,1999) α = .93
2018*
Sparks
Foreign Language Reading Anxiety Scale (FLRAS; Saito et al.,1999) α = .93
2018*
Reading Anxiety Scale (adapted from reading anxiety scales by
Taboada Katziret al.,2018; Ramirez, Fries, et al., 2018 and the Physiological
ω = .73
Barber 2021 State Subscale of the Sources of Self-Efficacy for Middle School
Mathematics Scale by Usher & Pajares, 2009)
Reading Anxiety Scale for Primary and Secondary School Students
Tonka 2020 α = .95
(Celikturk & Yamac, 2015)
Vanbecelaera Reading Anxiety Scale (adapted from Child Math Anxiety
α = .77
2020 Questionnaire by Ramirez, et al., 2016)
Reading Anxiety Scale (adapted from the Test Anxiety Scale by
Zhang 2018 α = .89
Pintrich et al., 1991)
*Articles used the same data set with different research questions
 34

Research Question 4

When examining the five areas of reading, articles were coded based on which areas were

assessed. For the purposes of this study, phonics and phonemic awareness were both coded as

phonics. Four of the twenty articles (20%) did not assess reading skills at all. Half of the articles

used some form of measure to assess the sample’s phonics skills. Forty percent of the articles

assessed the sample’s reading comprehension skills, and 40% assessed participants’ reading

fluency skills. Additionally, 20% of the assessed articles measured vocabulary skills. Of the

twenty articles, 65% (n=13) compared the measurement of reading skills to their measure of

reading anxiety.

Of the articles that compared reading anxiety measurement to a reading skill measure,

there was an average correlation of r = -.20, and a range of correlations from r = -.58 (Dong et

al., 2019) through r = .40 (Piccolo et al., 2021). A list of correlations is listed in Table 4.
 35

Table 4.

Reading Skills versus Reading Anxiety Correlations

Study Criterion Measure compared to Reading Anxiety Scale Pearson’s r

Receptive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test – 4th Edition (Martin &
Brownell, 2011) r = -.25
Chow 2017 Expressive Vocabulary Test – 2 Edition (Williams, 2007)
nd
r = -.30
Normal Reading Comprehension (NRC) test: Teacher-Student Double
Centered Learning Style Post Test (Xia, 2019; Zhang, 2018) r = -.54
Normal Reading Comprehension (NRC) test: Teacher-Student Double
Centered Learning Style Delayed Post Test (Xia, 2019; Zhang, 2018) r = -.58
Normal Reading Comprehension (NRC) test: Student Centered Learning
Style Post Test (Xia, 2019; Zhang, 2018) r = -.02
Normal Reading Comprehension (NRC) test: Student Centered Learning
Dong 2019 Style Delayed Post Test (Xia, 2019; Zhang, 2018) r = .07
Estrada-
Madronero
2019 Oral Reading Fluency Rubric (Rasinski, 2004) r = -.32
Phonemic Fluency Test (Kavé, 2005) r = -.26
Alef Ad Taf: Rapid Automatized Naming – Alphabet (Shany et al., 2006) r = -.19
Alef Ad Taf: Word Identification Task - Accuracy (Shany et al., 2006) r = -.16
Katzir 2018 Alef Ad Taf: Word Identification Task - Rate (Shany et al., 2006) r = -.28
WJ – III: Word Identification Subtest (Woodcock et al., 2001) r = -.17
Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills: Oral Reading Fluency
(Good & Kaminski, 2002) r = -.24
Macdonald Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test: Reading Comprehension (MacGinite et
2021 al., 2000) r = -.25
Isolated Words Reading (Salles et al., 2017) r =.32
Reading Words Fluency Task (Justi & Roazzi, 2012) r = .40
Piccolo 2021 Textual Reading Fluency (Basso et al., 2018) r =.37
TOWRE-2: Total Word Reading Efficiency (Torgesen et al., 2012) r =-.50
Pollack 2021 WRMT-III: Basic Reading Skills (Woodcock, 2011) r =-.45
WJ III: Letter Word Identification - Fall Reading Anxiety (Woodcock, et
al., 2001) r =-.41
Ramirez WJ III: Letter Word Identification - Spring Reading Anxiety (Woodcock et
2019 al., 2001) r =-.46

Sparks 2018* Spanish Phoneme Deletion Test (Sparks et al., 2018) r =-.23
 36

Study Criterion Measure compared to Reading Anxiety Scale Pearson’s r

Bateria III Woodcok-Munoz Pruebas de aprovechamiento: Word

Decoding (Woodcock et al., 2007 [2004]) r =-.38
Bateria III Woodcok-Munoz Pruebas de aprovechamiento: Reading
Comprehension (Woodcock et al., 2007 [2004]) r =-.37
Bateria III Woodcok-Munoz Pruebas de aprovechamiento: Vocabulary
Sparks 2018* (Woodcock et al., 2007 [2004]) r =-.37
WJ-IV: Letter-Word Identification – DLL Sample (Schrank et al., 2014) r =-.28

WJ-IV: Passage Comprehension – DLL Sample (Schrank et al., 2014) r =-.28

Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test: Reading Comprehension – DLL Sample
(MacGinitie et al., 2000) r =-.38
Taboada
Barber 2021 WJ-IV: Letter-Word Identification – ES Sample (Schrank et al., 2014) r =-.31
WJ-IV: Passage Comprehension – ES Sample (Schrank et al., 2014) r =-.26
Taboada Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test: Reading Comprehension – ES Sample
Barber 2021 (MacGinitie et al., 2000) r =-.40

Vanbecelaera Three-Minutes-Test (Moelands et al., 2003) r =-.07

2020 Analysis of Individual Word Forms Test (Krom et al., 2010) r =-.01
Zhang 2018 Normal Reading Comprehension (NRC) test (Zhang et al., 2014) r =-.17
*Both Sparks, 2018 articles assessed the same data base but used different research questions.
Therefore, both articles found the same correlations across criterion measures across articles.
 37

Research Question 5

To assess the ways in which researchers are defining the construct of reading anxiety

across the articles coded, explicit definitions of reading anxiety were pulled from the articles that

included them. Of the twenty articles assessed, twelve of the articles defined the construct of

reading anxiety. Four of the articles provided their own definition of the construct. The sixteen

other articles used a previously developed definition for the construct of reading anxiety. One

article by Taboada Barber et al. (2021) used the definitions from two of the other analyzed

articles that created their own definition of the construct (Katzir et al.2018; Ramirez et al., 2019).

Additionally, definitions developed by Piccolo and colleagues (2017), Jalango & Hirsh (2010),

and Zhao and colleagues (2018) were repeated across two analyzed articles each, respectively.

Across the twelve definitions three general themes of how reading anxiety was defined

emerged. The physical theme was represented by definitions that included some form of

behavior or physical symptoms felt when experiencing reading anxiety. For example, Kilinic &

Yenen (2016) define physical symptoms such as “sweating, trembling hands, [and] fast

breathing.” The cognitive theme included articles that depicted beliefs and thoughts about

oneself when interacting with reading. Definitions that included “self-perceptions” (Dong et al.,

2019) or “self-esteem” (Kilinc & Yenen, 2016) were included in this theme. The final and most

common theme across the definitions was the emotional reaction to reading, which includes

concepts such as fear (Ramirez, et al., 2019), apprehension (Chow et al., 2017), and negative

affect (Katzir et al., 2018). Many articles fell into the emotional theme (92%). The articles that

defined the construct of reading anxiety, definition included, and the general themes are listed in

Table 5.
 38

Table 5.

Reading Anxiety Definitions Provided in the Systematic Review

General Theme(s) of
Article Definition
Definition
Foreign language anxiety (FLA) is a type of situation-
specific anxiety defined as a complex combination of
Chow, et al.,
self-perceptions, beliefs and feelings of tension and Cognitive, Emotional
2017
apprehension uniquely associated with foreign
language usage such as reading
A distinct complex of self-perceptions, behaviors, and Physical, Emotional,
Dong, et al., 2019
affective feelings related to text reading activity. Cognitive
A situational phobia that is characterized by an
Estrada-
unpleasant, disturbing emotional reaction experienced Emotional
Madronero 2019
by students when reading.
Second language reading anxiety refers to the tense or
Ismail, 2015 stressful feeling associated with learning or practicing Emotional
reading.
One's negative affect and worry about reading
Katzir, et al.,
occurring along a continuum in typically developing Emotional
2018
and struggling readers
A personal phobia related to the act of reading. When
the act of reading is taking place, it might be expected
Kilinc & Yenen,
for students to show physical and cognitive symptoms Physical, Cognitive
2016
such as sweating, trembling hands, fast breathing,
helplessness, and low self-esteem
An emotional and/or unpleasant physical reaction
Piccolo, et al.,
when children perform or think about reading Emotional, Physical
2021
activities
Pollack, et al., Negative emotional, cognitive, and physiological Physical, Emotional,
2021 reactions to reading. Cognitive
Ramirez, et al., An acute fear or apprehension related to situations that
Emotional
2019 require the processing of textual information
In contrast to a general anxiety for L2 learning, L2
reading anxiety was hypothesized to be “... the anxiety
Sparks, et al.,
that learners experience during the FL [L2] reading Emotional
2018*
process and thus is related to the specific skill of
reading”
Sparks, Patton,
and Luebbers, Same as Sparks et al. (2018) Emotional
2018*
An achievement emotion of fear or worry linked to
Taboada Barber, situations that entail processing textual information
Emotional
et al., 2021 occurring along a continuum in typically developing
and struggling readers

*Articles used the same data set with different research questions
 39

CHAPTER 4

Discussion

This study sought to understand the current state of reading anxiety research literature by

conducting a systematic review of current literature regarding experimental studies assessing the

construct of reading anxiety. The systematic review’s main goal was to determine the breadth of

the current research base, and analyze the demographics, methodologies, constructs, and

conclusions found within the current published literature.

Area of Publication

Reading anxiety experimental research has been found in a large variety of publications.

The research is published across journals with similar themes. Most of the literature in the scope

of the systematic review was found in education journals, which aligns with findings that cite

reading anxiety’s potential impact in the classroom (Ramierez et al., 2019). Research published

in language-focused publications were also in the scope of the systematic review, which

highlights the current breadth of research focused on foreign language reading anxiety.

Demographics

Reading anxiety experimental research, in the scope of this systematic review, included

samples between Kindergarteners and twelfth graders. Most samples looked at students in fourth

to eighth grade. These samples focus on an age where students begin to transition from learning

to read to reading to learn (Pokharel, 2018). Early grade levels, when students are learning to

read, may be able to implement reading interventions early to prevent reading skill deficits

during the years between 4th and 8th grade. Thus, 4th through 8th graders who may still struggle

with reading may exhibit more anxious behaviors connected to reading, which is why they are

easily sampled. Additionally, nationally, reading abilities are declining for fourth graders around
 40

the country, so most studies using this grade in their samples highlights the need to understand

why our students are struggling and how we can help (NAEP, 2022). However, reading anxiety’s

influence in this area still unclear and needs further research to help assess the issues that are still

impacting students.

Fifty percent of the articles assessed in the scope of this systematic review focused on

students learning a second language. Reading anxiety is often tied with L2 learners (Alkhateeb et

al., 2014; Katzir et al., 2018; Ramirez et al., 2019). This highlights the need to increase the

number of studies tied directly to emerging literacy skills and L1 literacy skills for students.

While most articles found in the study compared reading skills of some form to reading anxiety,

only one of those articles (MacDonald et al., 2021) looked at samples of students flagged as “At-

Risk” readers, meaning they fell below grade level expectations. To get a better understanding of

the relationships between reading skill achievement and reading anxiety, more research needs to

be conducted with mixed samples of grade-level and at-risk readers. Some articles acknowledged

participants’ socio-economic status, drawing connections between a student’s access to

resources, their feelings about reading, and their reading achievement (Dong et al.,2019; Gencer

& Demirgunes, 2019; Katzir et al., 2018; Kilinc & Yenen, 2016). It was understood that students

with less resources may feel less confident in their reading abilities, developing into a larger

anxiety (Gencer & Demirgunes, 2019). These connections and relationships should be analyzed

further.

Methodology

Experimental research, within the scope of the systematic review, looked at the varying

relationships between the proposed constructs (i.e., reading anxiety vs. reading achievement).

The frequency of correlational studies, however, do not answer the question as to the reciprocal
 41

nature of the relationship. Rather, studies did find relationships, but it is still unclear the cause of

the relationships. Additionally, with the limited number of established reading anxiety scales that

are not developed for foreign language (Saito et al., 1999) in this systematic review, it would be

suspected that there should be a sort of urgency within the research community to develop

reliable reading anxiety scales through scale development studies, assessing internal consistency

and factor analysis for example.

Only 45% of articles within the systematic review included a full method section, per the

guidelines outlined in the Procedures and Standards Handbook created by What Works

Clearinghouse (What Works Clearinghouse, 2022). These guidelines set a standard for studies to

be repeated in the future, allowing for future replication of findings. Without a proper method

section, studies themselves cannot be repeated to the rigor that was initially laid out and findings

cannot be replicated nor generalized to other populations. Most of the incomplete method

sections were missing a data analysis section, only including a results section. Articles missing

sections such as participants, materials, or procedures lack the ability to be replicated accurately

to find similar or contradictory results across experimentations to solidify findings. Further, only

35% of articles included the scales they used in their appendices. Zhang and colleagues (2018),

who developed their own scale, did not include a copy of the scale in the appendices. This means

that this study will not be able to be replicated, unless a copy of the scale was published

elsewhere or the authors make the scale available some other way. Study replication helps

further develop the depth of research available on a specific construct. Without a way to properly

replicate the available reading anxiety studies, the depth of research available comparative to

math anxiety will be unattainable (Boarroso et al., 2021).

 42

Across the breadth of the current systematic review, only 50% of articles used previously

established reading anxiety scales. Forty percent of the established scales used focused on L1

English speaking students, the other 60% are foreign language focused scales. Further, 40% of

articles within the systematic review adapted scales from previously established scales to fit the

needs of their study, like Katzir and colleagues (2018) and Alkhateeb and colleagues (2019).

This method lacks, however, the assessments that determine if scales are valid and reliable.

While this systematic review included the internal consistency alphas that articles provided to

define reliability, there are other measures, like validity measures and factor analysis, that need

to be provided to determine the solidity of a construct scale, highlighting the need for more scale

development studies on these adapted measures.

Reading Skills Assessed

Many of the articles within the systematic review make the connection between reading

anxiety and reading skills, posing to find the relationship between the two. Only 20% of the

articles coded did not report on reading skills at all, which shows that reading anxiety as a

construct is not always connected with reading achievement. Rather, it has also been related to

demographic variables (Gencer & Demirgunes, 2019) or the resources and factors that support

the reading process (Kilinc & Yenen, 2016). In connection to reading skills on the other hand,

most articles within the confines of the systematic review assess students’ phonics skills, which

is the first reading skill that many students learn. However, because the primary population

assessed by the articles in the analysis were between the grades of 4 th and 8th grade, reading

fluency and comprehension (assessed across 40% of articles) would make more sense, in terms

reading development. Nevertheless, an analysis of phonics, the base of reading skill

 43

development, is an appropriate skill to assess, as a deficit in this area impacts the rest of reading

skill development as a child goes through the educational system (Blachman, 2000).

Additionally, the articles that analyzed the relationships between reading anxiety and

reading skills did not find strong relationships. At most, some articles found moderate positive

relationships where r = .40 (Piccolo et al., 2021), which contradicts the hypothesized

relationship in previous research (Ramirez et al., 2019). Other articles found moderate negative

relationships r = -.58 (Dong et al., 2019), which has since been found in research such as

Macdonald and colleagues (2021). Within the breadth of the research coded in this systematic

review, it is unclear the exact relationship between reading anxiety and reading achievement and

supports the broadening of the research scope to find more experimental articles with a potential

more clarified correlation. It may be, however, that there is not an impactful relationship between

the two across the literature more broadly, which calls into question the practicality of assessing

this construct. Additionally, it may be the case that studies who found minimal or no results are

unlikely to be published, which could be related to publication bias, or the file drawer problem.

Construct Definition

Across the twelve definitions that are provided in the articles included in the systematic

review, there seems to be a consensus that reading anxiety seems to be “worry about the act of

reading, and how it manifests in emotional, physical, and cognitive ways.” This general

definition, however, only represents a limited scope of articles that are present in the current

study. Articles that were coded use definitions defined in previous research suggest that

broadening the included articles may provide more definitions of the construct. It should be

noted that there were articles within the confines of this systematic review that did not define the

concept of reading anxiety within their study. For future research to be replicated and
 44

generalized, it is important to provide operational definitions about what constructs are,

especially as reading anxiety is not as established within the literature.

The general themes across the definitions, emotional, cognitive, and physical, highlight

the varying ways in which anxiety, in general, has manifested in students prior (Carey et al.,

2017). Most definitions included an element of emotions into their definitions, which suggests

possible continued support for SEL curriculums within schools. The effects of reading anxiety

may lean more on the emotional side, rather than cognitive or physical, which can help

researchers tailor scales to assess the concept. Researchers should develop scales that ask more

questions about a student’s emotions when reading, rather than their thoughts or physical

experiences.

Limitations

One of the largest limitations of the current study was the very narrow scope that was

allowed via the inclusion and exclusionary criteria. The scope was purposefully very small (only

including articles from 2005-2021, samples with students k-12, and using a reading anxiety scale

of some form) to meet and manage within the confines of the project’s timeline. This systematic

review could have included a much larger range of articles to possibly include conceptual articles

such as Piccolo and colleagues (2017) and Jalongo & Hirsh (2010). These articles define reading

anxiety as a construct directly, but were not included in the current systematic review because

they do not use samples of students or a reading anxiety scale. Both articles recognize the large

emotional piece to what reading anxiety is, noting phobias and irrational fears, but they also

address the physical symptoms experienced and the cognitive process of negative thoughts

(Jalongo & Hirsh, 2010; Piccolo et al., 2017). In the same vein as conceptual articles, research

prior to 2005 were not included. Articles in the current systematic review used definitions from
 45

articles dated back to 1999 (Saito et al., 1999), and it may be the case that there are other articles

beyond the scope of the current systematic review that analyze the depth of research and clarity

of definition that this systematic review was looking for. Additionally, another limitation

regarding the definitions of reading anxiety was the limited sample size of provided definitions.

Another limitation within this systematic review, the observed breadth of the current

research, is that many articles use samples and scales of L2 learners. Experimental research is

focused on foreign language reading anxiety or foreign language anxiety in general (Chow et al.,

2017). Reading anxiety focused on a second language may not be the same as reading anxiety

with a first language, and it is important that this is considered when looking at the research

available for native language reading anxiety.

Future Paths

A future path of research would be to continue the work of this systematic review by

using a broader scope. Providing a larger time span and an allowance of more articles via

inclusionary/exclusionary criteria would be great first steps. From this larger research study,

pathways towards scale development and relationships between reading skills can be more

focused with a clearer picture of the current breadth and depth of research. Additionally, the

current systematic review found gaps in the literature. There were studies found with limited

ability to be repeated or replicated due to lack of construct definition as well as limited method

sections. Future research needs to have a clear set of standards, like that provided by What

Works Clearing House (2022), to withstand the test of time in published literature with efficacy.

Conclusion

This study represents a beginning step towards examining reading anxiety studies and the

current literature available. While the information found is beneficial to make general
 46

conclusions about the current breadth of the research, there is much more that needs to be done

to create a better understanding. While reading anxiety does not seem to have the same base of

literature as math anxiety (Boarroso et al., 2021), there is a clear understanding of reading skills

compared to math skills. There are clear breakdowns of the progression a student goes through to

learn how to read, and additionally where to intervene if there are issues. That is not the case for

math, which has a much less intervention specification for math concepts past basic

understanding. It is possible that this limitation may be why math anxiety exists and is more

represented in the literature. The way in which interventions can be and are provided is more

unclear compared to reading, so many more students may fall in the “anxious about math”

category.

The directionality of the relationship between reading skills and reading anxiety is still

inconsistently reported, it may be the case that this concept is easily remedied with strong

reading interventions throughout a child’s time in school. This may be due to that fact that there

is not an agreed upon definition of the concept within the literature, nor are there established

scales to measure reading anxiety. The understanding of the research still has room to grow. The

current study has continued the search for understanding, but the breadth and depth of reading

anxiety is still left to be discovered.

 47

References

Alkhateeb, H. M. (2014). Reading anxiety, classroom anxiety, language motivation, reader self-
perception, and Arabic achievement of Arab-American students learning Arabic as a
second language. Psychological Reports, 115(3), 918–931.
doi:10.2466/11.PR0.115c27z6\

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders
(5th ed.). American Psychiatric Publishing.

Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2013). Early warning confirmed: A research update on third-grade
reading. Baltimore, MD: Feister, L.

Ashcraft, M. H., & Kirk, E. P. (1998). The relationships among working memory, math anxiety,
math competence, and attitudes toward math. Unpublished manuscript.

Ashcraft, M. H., & Kirk, E. P. (2001). The relationships among working memory, math anxiety,
and performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130(2), 224–237.
doi:10.1037/0096-3445.130.2.224

Awanda, G. M., & Ghaith, G. M. (2018). Effect of the Paideia seminar on the comprehension of
poetry and reading anxiety. Reading Psychology, 39(1), 69-89.
doi:10.1080/02702711.2017.1384206

Barroso, C., Ganley, C. M., McGraw, A. L., Geer, E. A., Hart, S. A., & Daucourt, M. C. (2021).
A meta-analysis of the relation between math anxiety and math
achievement. Psychological Bulletin, 147(2), 134-168.
doi:10.1037/bul0000307

Blachman, B. A. (2000). Phonological awareness. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Rosenthal, P. D.

Pearson, and R. Barr (eds.), Handbook of reading research, 3, pp. 483-502. Mahwah,
NJ: Erlbaum.

Broadhurst, P. L. (1959). The interaction of task difficulty and motivation: The Yerkes Dodson
law revived. Acta Psychologica, Amsterdam.

Brown, L. A., Forman, E. M., Herber, J. D., Hoffman, K. L., Yuen, E. K., & Goetter, E. M.
(2011). A randomized controlled trial of acceptance-based behavior therapy and
cognitive therapy for test anxiety: A pilot study. Behavior Modification, 35, 31-53.
doi:10.1177/0145445510390930

Carey, E., Devine, A., Hill, F., & Szucs, D. (2017). Differentiating anxiety forms and their role
in academic performance from primary to secondary school. PloS One, 12(3), e0174418.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0174418
 48

Cimpian, J. R., Lubienski, S. T., Timmer, J. D., Makowski, M. B., & Miller, E. K. (2016). Have
gender gaps in math closed? Achievement, teacher perceptions, and learning behaviors
across two ECLS-K cohorts. AERA Open, 2, 1–19. doi:10.1177/2332858416673617

Chall, J. S., Jacobs, V. A., & Baldwin, L. E. (1990). The reading crisis: Why poor children fall
behind, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Chen, C.M., Wang, J. Y., Chen, Y, T., & Wu, J. H. (2016). Forecasting reading anxiety for
promoting English-language reading performance based on reading annotation behavior.
Interactive Learning Environments, 24(4), 681-705. doi:10.1080/10494820.2014.917107

Chow, B.W.Y., Chui, B. H. T., Lai, M. W. C. & Kwok, S. Y. C. L. (2017). Differential

influences of parental home literacy practices and anxiety in English as a foreign
language on Chinese children’s English development. International Journal of bilingual
Education and Bilingualism, 206(6), 625-637.

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL). (2022). Fundamentals of
sel. CASEL. Retrieved March 26, 2022, from https://casel.org/fundamentals-of-sel/
Dodson, J. D. (1915). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation in the
kitten. J. anim. Behav., 5, 330-336.

Dong, Y., Wu, S. X., Wang, W., & Peng, S. (2019). Is the student-centered learning style more
effective than the teacher-student double-centered learning style in improving reading
performance? Frontiers in Psychology, 10. doi:10/3389/fpsyg.2019.02630

Duncan, G. J., Dowsett, C. J., Claessens, A., Magnuson, K., Huston, A. C., Klebanov, P., Pagani,
L. S., Feinstein, L., Engel, M., Brooks-Gun, J., Sexton, H., Duckworth, K., & Japel, C.
(2007). School readiness and later achievement. Developmental Psychology, 43, 1428–
1446. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.6.1428

Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. (2011). The
impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-
based universal interventions. Child Development, 82, 405-432.

Dweck, C. S. (1975). The role of expectations and attributions in the alleviation of learned
helplessness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 674-685.
doi:10.1037/h0077149.

Edwards, A. A., Daucourt, M. C., Hart, S. A., & Schatschneider, C. (2022). Measuring reading
anxiety in college students. Reading and Writing, 1-36.

Escolar-Llamazares, M. C., & Serrano-Pintado, I. (2019). Cognitive-behavioral intervention in a

case of anxiety about public reading: Improvement of fluency and comprehension.
Revista de Psicología Clínica Con Niños y Adolescentes, 6(2), 54–61.
 49

Faust, M. W., Ashcraft, M. H., & Fleck, D. E. (1996). Mathematics anxiety effects in simple and
complex addition. Mathematical Cognition, 2, 26-62.

Francis, D. A., Caruana, N., Hudson, J. L., & McAthur, G. M. (2019). The association between
poor readings and internalizing problems: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Clinical Psychology Review, 67, 45-60. doi:10/1016/j.cpr.2018.09.002

Francis, D., Hudson, J. L., Kohnen, S., Mobach, L., & McAthur, G. M. (2021). The effect of an
integrated reading and anxiety intervention for poor readers with anxiety. PeerJ, 9,
e10987. doi:10.7717/peerj.10987

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., & Jenkins, J. R. (2001). Oral reading fluency as an
indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical
analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5(3), pp. 239–256.

Gençer, Y., & Demirgünes, S. (2019). An analysis of secondary school students’ anxiety levels
according to parameters of gender, grade level, socioeconomic level, and reading
frequency. International Education Studies, 12(9), 91-96.

Grills, A. E., Fletcher, J. M., Vaughn, S., Barth, A., Denton, C. A., & Stuebing, K. K. (2014).
Anxiety and response to reading intervention among first grade students. Child & Youth
Care Forum, 43(4), 417–431. doi:10.1007/s10566-014-9244-3

Grills-Taquechel, A. E., Fletcher, J. M., Vaughn, S. R., Denton, C. A., & Taylor, P. (2013).
Anxiety and inattention as predictors of achievement in early elementary school children.
Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 26(4), 391–410. doi:10.1080/10615806.2012.691969

Hembree, R. (1990). The nature, effects, and relief of mathematics anxiety. Journal for Research
in Mathematics Education, 21(1), 33–46. doi:10.2307/749455

Ismail, S. A. A. (2015). Secondary school students’ reading anxiety in a second language.

English Language Teaching, 8(11), 28-41.

Jalongo, M. R., & Hirsh, R. A. (2010). Understanding reading anxiety: New insights from
neuroscience. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37, 431–435. doi:10.1007/s10643-
010-0381-5.

Katzir, T., Kim, Y. S. G., & Dotan, S. (2018). Reading self-concept and reading anxiety in
second grade children: The roles of word reading, emergent literacy skills, working
memory and gender. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1180–1113.
doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01180

Kilinc, H. H., & Yenen, E. T. (2016). Investigation of students’ reading anxiety with regards to
some variables. International Journal of Higher Education, 5(1), 111-118.
 50

Laski, E. V., & Siegler, R. S. (2014). Learning from number board games: You learn what you
encode. Developmental Psychology, 50(3), 853–864. doi:10.1037/a0034321

Lauermann, F., Chow, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2015). Differential effects of adolescents’ expectancy
and value beliefs about math and English on math/science-related and human services-
related career plans. International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology, 7, 205–
228. Retrieved from
http://genderandset.open.ac.uk/index.php/genderandset/article/view/393

Logan, G. D., & Klapp, S. T. (1991). Automatizing alphabet arithmetic: Is extended practice
necessary to produce automaticity? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Memory, and Cognition, 17, 179-195.

Massetti, G.M., Lahey, B.B., Pelham, W.E., Loney, J., Ehrhardt, A., Lee, S.S., & Kipp, H.
(2008). Academic achievement over 8 years among children who met modified criteria
for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder at 4-6 years of age. Journal of Abnormal Child
Psychology, 36, 399–410.

McCormac, M. E., & Snyder, S. (2019). Districtwide initiative to improve tier 1 with evidence-
based classroom lessons. Professional School Counseling, 22(1b), 2156759X19834438.

Macdonald, K. T., Cirino, P. T., Miciak, J., & Grills, A. E. (2021). The role of reading anxiety
among struggling readers in fourth and fifth grade. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 37,
382-394. doi:10.1080/10573569.2021.1874580

McGee, R., Prior, M., Williams, S., Smart, D., & Sanson, A. (2002). The long-term significance
of teacher-rated hyperactivity and reading ability in childhood: Findings from two
longitudinal studies. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 43, 1004–1017.
doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00228

Muter, V., Hulme, C., Snowling, M. J., & Stevenson, J. (2004). Phonemes, rimes, vocabulary,
and grammatical skills as foundations of early reading development: evidence from a
longitudinal study. Developmental psychology, 40(5), 665.

National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2022). NAEP report cards - home. The Nation's
Report Card. Retrieved March 26, 2022, from https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the
scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading
instruction. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human
Development.

Piccolo, L. R., Giacomoni, C. H., Julio-Costa, A., Oliveira, S., Zbornik, J., Haase, V. G., &
Salles, J. F. (2017). Reading anxiety in L1: Reviewing the concept. Early Childhood
Education Journal, 45(4), 537–543. doi:10.1007/s10643-016-0822-x
 51

Piccolo, L. da R., Giacomoni, C. H., Lima, M., Basso, F. P., Haase, V. G., Zbornik, J., & de
Salles, J. F. (2020). Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Brazilian version of
the Reading Anxiety Scale: Short version. Estudos de Psicologia, 37. doi:10.1590/1982-
0275202037e180169

Piccolo, L. da R., Giacomoni, C. H., Lima, M., Basso, F. P., Haase, V. G., Zbornik, J., & de
Salles, J. F. (2021). “Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Brazilian version of
the Reading Anxiety Scale: Short version”: Erratum. Estudos de Psicologia, 38.

Pokharel, P. K. (2018). Learning to read and reading to learn in English. Journal of NELTA
Surkhet, 5, 75-81.

Ramirez, G., Fries, L., Gunderson, E., Schaeffer, M. W., Maloney, E. A., Beilock, S. L., &
Levine, S. C. (2019). Reading anxiety: An early affective impediment to children’s
success in reading. Journal of Cognition and Development, 20(1), 15–34.
doi:10.1080/15248372.2018.1526175

Ramirez, G., Shaw, S. T., & Maloney, E. A. (2018). Math anxiety: Past research, promising
interventions, and a new interpretation framework. Educational Psychologist, 53(3), 145–
164. doi:10.1080/00461520.2018.1447384

Richard Albrecht, N. M., & Brunner, M. (2019). How positive behavioral supports and social-
emotional curriculum impact student learning. The European Journal of Social &
Behavioural Sciences.

Saito, Y., Horwitz, E. K., & Garza, T. J. (1999) Foreign language reading anxiety. The Modern
Language Journal, 83, 202 - 218.

Sonnenschein, S., & Galindo, C. (2015). Race/ethnicity and early mathematics skills: Relations
between home, classroom, and mathematics achievement. The Journal of Educational
Research, 108, 261–277. doi:10.1080/00220671.2014.880394

Sparks, R. L., Luebbers, J., Castaneda, M., & Patton, J. (2018). High school Spanish students and
foreign language reading anxiety: Déjà vu all over again. Modern Language Journal,
102(3), 533-556.

Sparks, R. L., Patton, J., & Luebbers, J. (2018). L2 anxiety and the foreign language reading
anxiety scale: Listening to the evidence. Foreign Language Annals, 51(4), 738-762.

Stahl, S. A. (2005). “Four problems with teaching word meanings (and what to do to make
vocabulary an integral part of instruction),” in E. H. Hiebert and M. L. Kamil
(eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing research to practice, Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
 52

Sung, Y. T., Chao, T. Y., & Tseng, F. L. (2016). Reexamining the relationship between test
anxiety and learning achievement: An individual-differences perspective. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 46, 241–252. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.07.001

Supekar, K., Iuculano, T., Chen, L., & Menon, V. (2015). Remediation of childhood math
anxiety and associated neural circuits through cognitive tutoring. Journal of
Neuroscience, 35, 12574–12583. doi:10.1523/jneur- osci.0786-15.2015

Taboada Barber, A., Klauda, S. L., & Wang, W. (2021). Reading anxiety, engagement, and
achievement: A comparison of emergen bilinguals and English monolinguals in the
elementary grades. Reading Research Quarterly. doi:10.1002/rrq/398

Taylor, R. D., Oberle, E., Durlak, J. A., & Weissberg, R. P. (2017). Promoting positive youth
development through school-based social and emotional learning interventions: A meta-
analysis of follow-up effects. Child Development, 88, 1156-1171.
doi:10.1111/cdev/12864

Tierney, R. J. (1982). Essential considerations for developing basic reading comprehension

skills. School Psychology Review 11(3), pp. 299–305.

Toste, J. R., Didion, L., Peng, P., Filderman, M. J., & McClelland, A. M. (2020). A meta-
analytic review of the relations between motivation and reading achievement for K–12
students. Review of Educational Research, 90(3), 420–456.
doi:10.3102/0034654320919352

U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education
Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2019 Reading
Assessment.

Van Mier, H. I., Schleepen, T. M., & Van den Berg, F. C. (2019). Gender differences regarding
the impact of math anxiety on arithmetic performance in second and fourth
graders. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2690.

Vanbecelaere, S., Van den Berge, K., Cornillie, F., Sasanguie, D., Reynvoet, B., & Depaepe, F.
(2020). The effects of two digital educational games on cognitive and non-cognitive math
and reading outcomes. Computers & Education, 142.
doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103680

Voyer, D., & Voyer, S. D. (2014). Gender differences in scholastic achievement: A meta-
analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 1174–1204. doi:10.1037/a0036620

Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., Rashotte, C. A., & Pearson, N. A. (2010). Test of silent reading
efficiency and comprehension. Pro-Ed.
 53

What Works Clearinghouse. (2022). What Works Clearinghouse procedures and standards
handbook, version 5.0. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences,
National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE)

Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation.

Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68–81. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1015

Yerkes, R. M. (1909). Modifiability of behavior in its relations to the age and sex of the dancing
mouse. Journal Of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 19, 237-271.

Zaff, J. F., Moore, K. A., Papillo, A. R., & Williams, S. (2003). Implications of extracurricular
activity participation during adolescence on positive outcomes. Journal of Adolescent
Research, 18(6), 599–630. doi:10.1177/0743558403254779

Zhang, J., Cheung, S. K., Wu, C., & Meng, Y. (2018). Cognitive and affective correlates of
Chinese children’s mathematical word problems solving. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. doi:
10/3389/fpsyg.2018.02357

Zirkel, P. A. (2011). State laws and guidelines for RTI: Additional implementation
features. Communiqué, 39(7), 30-32.
 54

APPENDICES

A: SEARCH AND CODING INSTRUCTIONS

1. Open the following Qualtrics link: https://siue.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8GI1onTmcvPSDwG

2. Search your predetermined database using one of the following search terms:
a. “academic anxiety AND reading”
b. “anxiety AND reading difficulties”
c. “anxiety AND reading skills”
d. “anxiety towards reading”
e. “reading anxiety”
f. “anxiety AND reading fluency”
g. “anxiety AND reading comprehension”
h. “reading anxiety scale”
3. Set search years to 2005-2021
4. If applicable, select only Peer Reviewed articles
For each article fill out the Qualtrics form as follows
Question Code Description
1: Coder (Your Name) Name of coder filling out form
2: Data Based Used PsycInfo Select if your assigned data base is PsycInfo
ERIC Select if your assigned data base is ERIC
Google Scholar Select if your assigned data base is Google
Scholar
Other Select if you use another data base or journal to
search
3: Search Terms Used See above search terms, enter as Select the exact search term used
typed above
4: Article Title (Title of Article) Copy and paste the article title
5: Full Citation (Citation) Copy and paste the full APA citation
6: Abstract (Abstract) Copy and paste the full abstract
7: Peer Review Yes Yes, the article is peer reviewed
No No, the article is not peer reviewed
8: Journal Title (Journal Title) Copy and Paste the title of the journal the article
is published in
9: Sample Population (k-12) Yes Yes, the sample population is from grades K - 12
No No, the sample population is not from grades K -
12
10: Sample Population (college) Yes Yes, the sample population is from college level
No No, the sample population is not from college
11: Reading Anxiety Yes Yes, reading anxiety is measured via rating scales
or assessment of some kind (including assessment
of academic anxieties)
No No, reading anxiety is not explicitly measured
 55

B: FULL ARTICLE CODING INSTRUCTIONS

1. Open the following Qualtrics link:https://siue.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_4SEf2EcSLwRthbg

2. Open one of your predetermined articles
For each article fill out the Qualtrics form as follows
Question Code Description Additional Notes
1: Author and Year (Author Last Name Enter the Last Name of the first
Year) listed author followed by the Year
published
2: Coder (Your Initials) Enter the first and last initial of the It’s easier to read if they are
coder both capitalized
3: Article Title (Title of Article) Copy and paste the article title
4: Journal Title (Title of Journal) Copy and paste the journal title This can be found on the first
page of the article, sometimes
listed in the header or footer. If
you cannot find it send me a
message and I will find it for
you
5: Area of Cognitive Select if the journal publication
Publication broadly focuses on cognitive
psychology
Education Select if the journal publication *this is a broad category, if you
broadly focuses on are unsure send me a message
education/educational psychology
School Psychology Select if the journal publication
broadly focuses on school
psychology
Other Select if the journal publication
does not focus on any of the above
codes. Enter the category it falls
into in the box.
6: Sample Size (Sample Size) Enter the *Final* sample used in Make sure you find the final
the method section sample and not the initial
sample size
7: Grade Level Preschool Select if sample includes students This includes students aged 2-4
in Preschool
Kindergarten Select if sample includes students This includes students aged 5-6
in Kindergarten
First Select if sample includes students This includes students aged 6-7
in First Grade
Second Select if sample includes students This includes students aged 7-8
in Second Grade
Third Select if sample includes students This includes students aged 8-9
in Third Grade
Fourth Select if sample includes students This includes students aged 9-
in Fourth Grade 10
Fifth Select if sample includes students This includes students aged 10-
in Fifth Grade 11
 56

Sixth Select if sample includes students This includes students aged 11-
in Sixth Grade 12
Seventh Select if sample includes students This includes students aged 12-
in Seventh Grade 13
Eighth Select if sample includes students This includes students aged 13-
in Eighth Grade 14
Ninth Select if sample includes students This includes students aged 14-
in Ninth Grade 15
Tenth Select if sample includes students This includes students aged 15-
in Tenth Grade 16
Eleventh Select if sample includes students This includes students aged 16-
in Eleventh Grade 17
Twelfth Select if sample includes students This includes students aged 17-
in Twelfth Grade 18
8: English Language English as a First Select if the sample is students
Learners Language learning English as their FIRST
language
English as a Second Select if the sample is students This could also be labelled as
Language learning English as their SECOND “ELL” or “English Language
language Learners”
Another Language Select if the sample is students
as a Second learning a foreign language as their
Language SECOND language
No Select if the sample does not
involve Language learning
9: Risk Status Yes Select if the sample describes any This includes any form of IEP
form of risk eligibility or flagged reading
risk status
No Select if the sample does not This includes gen. ed.
include any risk status Populations or do not specify
any risk status
9a: Type of Risk Specific Learning Select if sample includes students
Status Disability with SLD
Autism Spectrum Select if sample includes students
Disorder with ASD
Behavior Problems Select if sample includes students
with notated behavior problems
Risk for Reading Select if sample includes students This risk status could be found
Failures labeled as “at risk for reading through benchmarking or
failure” progress monitoring data
Other Select if risk status is not listed as
above, and describe the type of
risk status into blank
10: Study Structure Single – Subject Select if the study uses a single- which the subject serves as
Design subject design structure his/her own control, rather than
utilizing another
individual/group,
baseline/intervention stages
Group Comparison Select if the study uses a group A Control Group is a group of
Study comparison model individuals who received no
 57

treatment or a standard
treatment. In contrast, a
Comparison Group is a group
of individuals who received no
treatment or an alternative
treatment. You may see the
similarity between both
Scale Development Select if the study is developing a the process of creating a new
Study scale of any form instrument for measuring an
unobserved or latent construct,
such as depression, sociability,
or fourth-grade mathematics
ability
Correlational Study Select if the study is comparing type of research design that
variables within the same group of looks at the relationships
students between two or more variables
Other Select if the study structure is not
listed above, and insert study type
into blank
11: Methods Section Participants Select if the methods section Select all that apply
Includes includes a description of
participants
Materials Select if the methods section Select all that apply
includes a description of the
materials used in the study
Methods Select if the methods section Select all that apply
includes a description of the
procedures of the study
Data Analysis Select if the methods section Select all that apply
includes a description of the data
analysis that was used for the
study
12: Attachments Yes Select if the study included an The study may not note that
attachment of any of the materials materials are attached, so you
used in the appendix may need to just scroll through
the survey to check
No Select if the study did not include
attachments of any of the used
materials
13: Additional Yes Select if the study included links
Resources or additional studies to provide
more information about the studies
procedures
No Select if the study does not include
any links or additional studies to
provide more information about
the studies procedures
14: Reading Skills Yes Select if reading skills are assessed Reading skills include phonics,
Measured in some way in the study fluency, vocabulary, or
comprehension
 58

No Select if reading skills are not

assessed in some way in the study
14a. Reading Skills Phonics Select if study assessed phonics Select all that apply
Fluency Select if study assessed reading Select all that apply
fluency
Vocabulary Select if study assessed vocabulary Select all that apply
Comprehension Select if study assessed reading Select all that apply
comprehension
15. Reading Anxiety Yes Select if reading anxiety is This includes foreign language
measured in the study reading anxiety
No Select if reading anxiety is not
measured in the study
15a. Reading Yes Select if reading anxiety was
Anxiety Measured measured by a scale
Scale
No Select if reading anxiety was not
measured by a scale
15b. Reading (Scale Name) Insert the name of the reading Include a citation of the scale if
Anxiety Scale Name anxiety scale used citation is provided
15c. Reading (Method Name) Insert the name of the method used This could be through an
Anxiety Method to measure reading anxiety interview with students for
example
16. Reading Anxiety Yes Select if the researchers provided a May be found in intro,
Definition clear definition of reading anxiety materials, or discussion
No Select if the researchers do not Select this if researchers define
provide a definition of reading other forms of anxiety but NOT
anxiety reading anxiety
16a. Reading (Reading Anxiety Insert the definition found in the Include a page number at the
Anxiety Definition Definition) study end of the definition
17. RA comparison Yes Select if the researchers did This could be achievement
compare their measure of reading scores or another reading
anxiety to another measure anxiety measure etc.
No Select if the researchers did not
compare their measure of reading
anxiety to another measure
18. RA relationship Yes Select if the researchers looked at This includes any of the areas
with RS the relationship between reading of reading skills (phonics,
anxiety and a form of reading fluency, vocab, comprehension)
achievement
No Select if the researchers did not
look at the relationship between
reading anxiety and a form of
reading achievement
18a. Criterion (criterion measure) Insert what the reading anxiety For example, GPA or
measures scores were compared to comprehension scores
18b. Correlations (correlation) Insert the correlation value You can right it out as r=.xxx.
between reading anxiety and Even if the article finds no
reading achievement relationship include the
correlation coefficient. You
 59

may need to look at the tables

included.
19. Reliability Yes Select if the researchers did the consistency of the findings
include evidence of some measure or results of a psychology
of reliability research study. If findings or
results remain the same or
similar over multiple attempts,
a researcher often considers it
reliable. For example this may
be the reliability of questions in
a scale.
No Select if the researchers did not
include evidence of some measure
of reliability
19a. Reliability Internal Select if the researchers used the internal consistency of a
Type internal reliability measure (i.e. consistency within
itself), such as whether the
different questions (known as
'items') in a questionnaire are
all measuring the same thing
Interobserver Select if the researchers used inter- the extent to which two or more
observer reliability observers are observing and
recording behavior in the same
way
Test-Retest Select if the researchers used test - a measure of reliability
restest reliability obtained by administering the
same test twice over a period of
time to a group of individuals
Parallel-Form Select if the researchers used a measure of reliability
parallel form reliability obtained by administering
different versions of an
assessment tool (both versions
must contain items that probe
the same construct, skill,
knowledge base, etc.) to the
same group of individuals
Other Select if the form of reliability was
not noted above. Insert into the
blank
19b. Reliability (Coefficient) Insert the overall reliability This most likely will be in the
Coefficient coefficient found form of Cronbach’s alpha
 ProQuest Number: 30421758

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality and completeness of this reproduction is dependent on the quality
and completeness of the copy made available to ProQuest.

Distributed by ProQuest LLC ( 2023 ).

Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author unless otherwise noted.

This work may be used in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons license
or other rights statement, as indicated in the copyright statement or in the metadata
associated with this work. Unless otherwise specified in the copyright statement
or the metadata, all rights are reserved by the copyright holder.

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17,

United States Code and other applicable copyright laws.

Microform Edition where available © ProQuest LLC. No reproduction or digitization

of the Microform Edition is authorized without permission of ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346 USA