Loading…

Cross-sectional and longitudinal confirmatory factor models for the german test anxiety inventory: A construct validation

Construct validity of the German Test Anxiety Inventory (TAI-G) was tested in two respects. Firstly, the purported four-dimensional structure of the TAI-G (comprising subscales Emotionality, Worry, Interference, and Lack of Confidence) as well as relations of the test anxiety dimensions to self-effi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Anxiety, stress, and coping stress, and coping, 2003-09, Vol.16 (3), p.251-270
Main Authors: Keith, Nina, Hodapp, Volker, Schermelleh-engel, Karin, Moosbrugger, Helfried
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Construct validity of the German Test Anxiety Inventory (TAI-G) was tested in two respects. Firstly, the purported four-dimensional structure of the TAI-G (comprising subscales Emotionality, Worry, Interference, and Lack of Confidence) as well as relations of the test anxiety dimensions to self-efficacy were tested. Secondly, the trait conception of the TAI-G was tested within the framework of Latent State-Trait theory. The TAI-G was given to a student sample (N=302) on three occasions with a time interval of 2 weeks along with a study-specific self-efficacy scale on occasion 1. Dimensionality assumptions as well as relations with self-efficacy were tested using cross-sectional second-order confirmatory factor analysis. The trait conception was tested separately for TAI-G subscales by specifying longitudinal confirmatory factor models (Latent State-Trait models) and by calculating variance proportions of manifest variables (Latent State-Trait coefficients) referring to different sources of systematic variance (person, situation, and method) based on parameter estimates of the models. Results were supportive of both the purported four-dimensional structure and hypothesized relationships to self-efficacy (i.e., acceptable model fit) as well as of the trait conception of test anxiety (i.e., acceptable model fit and high proportion of variance due to person component). Implications for further validation studies were discussed.
ISSN:1061-5806
1477-2205
DOI:10.1080/1061580031000095416