CRITIQUE AND NOTES
TABLE 2 anxiety factors: autonomic overreactivily and
I1'ACTOR ANALYSIS:
COMPONENTS OP ANXIKI y
Component I II
1. Physiological concomitants .43
(observed)
2. Physiological concomitants .55
(reported)
3. Subjective feelings .62
4. Somatic complaints .46
S. Distractibility .45
6. Restlessness .01
7. Worry -.05
8. Muscular tension .15
fall under the heading of what Eysenck has called
conditioned anxiety.
Thus the results of this study are consistent
with those of Hamilton (1959) in finding two
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology
1962, Vol. 65, No. 6, 427-428
FURTHER VALIDATION OF THE ALPERT-HABER ACHIEVEMENT
ANXIETY TEST
WILLIAM N. DEMBER, FRANK NAIRNE, AND FRANCIS JOSEPH MILLER 1
University oj Cincinnati
This note reports some further validation
data on the recently devised test anxiety scale
described in this journal by Alpert and Haber
(1960). The Alpert-Haber scale was designed
to measure anxiety experienced in conjunction
with test taking; it differs from the Mandler-
Sarason (1952) scale in that it distinguishes
between anxiety that is reported by the re-
spondents as debilitating and anxiety reported
as facilitating test performance. Each type of
anxiety is measured in a separate subset of items
of a 19-item scale.
To summarize briefly a considerable amount
of data, Alpert and Haber (1960) report that
the two subscales are negatively correlated with
each other (r — — .48) and that each of the
scales correlates (r's in the .20s) with: per-
formance on the SAT; score on a midterm test,
final exam grade, and course grade in introductory
psychology; and (r's in the .30s) with overall
grade-point average. Multiple correlations, pre-
dicting both grade-point average and final exam
!The authors are grateful to Jane Blumberg and
Robert McCullers for their participation in this
research.
427
conditioned anxiety. The single discrepancy was
(hat Distractibility loaded on the autonomic fac-
tor; if this finding is confirmed by further re-
search, it might be speculated that physiological
.00 symptoms interfere with attentiveness. The pres-
ent study extends Eyscnck's (1961) hypothesis
.08 to psychiatric inpatients, and it may be concluded
-.02 that his two-factor approach to anxiety, which
.00 has led to fruitful laboratory research, is also
.00 clinically meaningful.
.62
.45
.46 REFERENCES
EYSENCK, H. J. The handbook of abnormal psychol-
ogy. New York: Basic Books, 1961.
HAMILTON, M. The assessment of anxiety states by
rating. Brit. J. med. Psychol., 1959, 32, 50-S9.
(Received July 18, 1961)
grade from a combination of SAT and either
of the anxiety scores, ranged from .29 to .58.
In two studies, we have collected data on
measures comparable to those above. The two
populations from which our subjects were drawn
differ from each other and from the population
(Stanford University students) sampled by Alpert
and Haber (1960); and our performance meas-
ures are somewhat different from theirs. Thus,
our studies not only provide an opportunity for
confirmation of the data reported by Alpert and
Haber, they also bear on the generality of the
earlier results. Finally, we have some evidence on
the relative usefulness of the scale for male and
female subjects.
STUDY I
The subjects in the first study were 39 male
students enrolled in an experimental psychology
class in a Catholic seminary in Norwood, Ohio.
Their age range was from 20 to 30 years, with a
median of 22. For each subject the following
performance data were obtained: score on the
School and College Ability Test (SCAT); score
on the midterm test (MTT) in experimental psy-
chology; overall grade-point average (GPA) earned
in the previous semester. The Alpert-Haber question-
428
TABLE 1
INTKKCOKRELATIONS BKTWK.KN A N X I E T Y AND
PERFORMANCE MEASURES IN
STUDY I
Midterm
Measure SCAT
+.43**
AAT+ -.65** +.27*
AAT- -.35* -.46**
+ .39**
SCAT
* p < .05, AS = 37. ouc-lailcd lest.
** p < .01, df = 37, one-tailed test.
nairc was administered by the instructor (l''JM)
as part of the regular course work, and the subjects
were assured that the information would be used
for research purposes only. For each subject a
facilitating (AAT+) score and a debilitating (AAT—)
score was determined.
Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients
were computed between the two anxiety measures,
and between each of them and the three performance
measures. In addition, correlation coefficients were
computed between SCAT and MTT and between
SCAT and GPA; these were needed for the multiple
correlations described below. The results are given
in Table 1. All of the correlation coefficients are
significantly different from zero, and in general are
considerably higher than those reported by Alpert
and Habcr (1960) for comparable measures.
Multiple correlations were also computed be-
tween each of the anxiety measures and the SCAT
as a pair of predictor variables and each of the
academic performance measures as criteria. These
.Ks arc given in Table 2.
STUDY II
Alpert and Haber (1960) give results only for
male subjects. Our second study was carried out
mainly for the purpose of comparing the useful-
ness of the scales for male and female subjects.
There is reason to expect that such a comparison
might reveal important differences (see, for example,
Carlson & Carlson, 1960).
The subjects in this study were 25 male and 39
female students enrolled in an introductory psy-
chology class in the University of Cincinnati. The
anxiety questionnaire was administered by the
TABLE 2
MULTIPLE CORRELATIONS PREDICTING MIDTERM TEST
(MTT) AND GRADE-POINT AVERAGE (GPA) FROM
A COMBINATION OF SCHOLASTIC APTITUDE
(SCAT) AND ANXIETY
Performance measure
Measure
MTT
SCAT and AAT+ .51
SCAT and AAT- .52
CRITIQUE AND NOTES
TABLE 3
fNTKRCOKKKl.ATlONS BETWEEN ANXIETY AND
PERFORMANCE MEASURES IN STUDY 11
Measure AAT - Course grade
Gradn-
poiut.
average
Males (N = 25)
AAT+ -.65** +.59**
+.52** AAT- -.34*
I''emalcs (A' = 39)
-.37* AAT+ -.42**
+.61** + .06
AAT- -.23
* p < .05, one-tailed teat.
**p <.01, one-tailed test.
instructor,2 at the beginning of a regular class
session. The only measure of academic performance
examined for these subjects was their final grade
in the introductory psychology class.
Correlation coefficients were computed, separately
for male and female subjects, between the two
anxiety measures and between each of these and
course grade. The results are given in Table 3.
For the female subjects only the correlation
between AAT+ and AAT— is significantly dif-
ferent from zero. The correlation of —.23 be-
tween AAT— and course grade for the females
is lower (p < .05) than the correlation of —.34
for the males. The correlations for the male sub-
jects are all significantly different from zero and
generally higher than those obtained by Alpert
and Haber (1960).
CONCLUSION
The two studies together lend confirmation and
generality to the original Alpert-Haber (1960)
data. Results of the second study also suggest a
limitation on the applicability of the scale: that
it is not as useful for female as for male subjects.
The high correlations obtained with our male
subjects, as compared with those obtained with
the Stanford students used by Alpert and Haber,
suggest that variables other than sex might also
influence the usefulness of the scale. It would be
premature to speculate on the identity of those
variables.
2
A. B. Kristofferson administered the anxiety
questionnaire and provided the information on course
grades.
REFERENCES
ALPERT, R., & HABER, R. N. Anxiety in academic
achievement situations. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol.,
1960, 61, 207-215.
CARLSON, E. R., & CARLSON, RAE. Male and female
subjects in personality research. J. abnorm. soc.
GPA
Psychol., 1960, 61, 482-483.
HANDLER, G., & SARASON, S. B. A study of anxiety
.71 and learning. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1952, 47,
.63 166-173.
(Received July 18, 1961)