Search

The emotion of boredom has sparked considerable interest in research on teaching and learning, but boredom during tests and exams has not yet been examined. Based on the control-value theory of achievement emotions, we hypothesized that students may experience significant levels of boredom during testing ("test boredom"; Hypothesis 1) and that test boredom may be significantly related to theoretically hypothesized antecedents (control and value appraisals; Hypothesis 2) and outcomes (performance; Hypothesis 3). We further hypothesized that test boredom was more detrimental when students felt overchallenged during the test than when they felt underchallenged ("abundance hypothesis"; Hypothesis 4). We tested these hypotheses in two studies (Study 1: N = 208 eighth graders; 54% female; Study 2: N = 1,612 fifth to 10th graders, 47% female) using both trait and state measures of test boredom in mathematics and their proposed antecedents and outcomes. In support of Hypothesis 1, participants reported statistically significant levels of boredom during tests. Furthermore, the relations of test boredom with its control and value antecedents (i.e., being over- or underchallenged, facets of value) were in line with our assumptions (Hypothesis 2). In support of Hypothesis 3, test boredom was significantly negatively related to academic achievement (grades). In line with Hypothesis 4, test scores were negatively related to boredom due to being overchallenged but unrelated, or even positively related, to boredom due to being underchallenged. Directions for future research on test boredom as well as practical implications are outlined.

Background: This study investigated the role of different test anxiety components (affective, cognitive, motivational and physiological) as mediators between control and performance as proposed by Pekrun's control-value theory (CVT). While all components were assessed via self-report, the physiological component was additionally assessed via electrodermal activity (EDA). Aims: We examined the relative impact of the self-reported anxiety components and EDA in this mediating mechanism to identify the most relevant assessment(s) (i.e., self-reported anxiety components and/or EDA) for predicting test performance. Sample: The study comprised 50 eighth graders. Methods: Data were collected during a mathematics test comprising six task blocks. State self-reports of control and anxiety components along with test performance and other test emotions were collected block-wise (i.e., repeated assessments within students). EDA was continuously recorded. Results: Consistent with CVT, intra-individual mediation analysis with multiple mediators revealed that higher control predicted lower anxiety (i.e., all self-reported components). Unexpectedly, higher control was associated with increased EDA. Follow-up analyses taking other test emotions into account suggested this might reflect positive activation. Correlations between EDA and control and self-reported anxiety components differed depending on which test emotion was dominant in each situation. Regarding test performance, only the cognitive component was a significant mediator and thus seems to play a pivotal role in the relationship between control and performance. Conclusions: Distinguishing between anxiety components and including unbiased physiological measures improve our understanding of the mechanisms behind the relationship between test anxiety and performance. Higher physiological arousal may be a sign of anxiety but can also be a sign of positive activation. When aiming to reduce negative effects of anxiety on performance, targeting the cognitive component seems crucial. Implications of these findings for educational and psychological practice are discussed.

Understanding the structure, antecedents, and outcomes of students' emotions has become a topic of major interest in research on mathematics education. Much of this work is based on the Achievement Emotions Questionnaire--Mathematics (AEQ-M), a self-report instrument assessing students' mathematics-related emotions. The AEQ-M measures seven emotions (enjoyment, pride, anger, anxiety, shame, hopelessness, boredom) across class, learning, and test contexts (internal structure). Based on control-value theory, it is assumed that these emotions are evoked by control and value appraisals, and that they influence students' motivation, learning strategies, and performance (external relations). Despite the popularity and frequent use of the AEQ-M, the research leading to its development has never been published, creating uncertainty about the validity of the proposed internal structure and external relations. We close this gap in Study 1 (N = 781 students, Grades 5-10, mean age 14.1 years, 53.5% female) by demonstrating that emotions are organized across contexts and linked to their proposed antecedents and outcomes. Study 2 (N = 699 students, Grade 7 and 9, mean age 14.0 years, 56.9% female) addresses another deficit in research on the AEQ-M, the lack of evidence regarding the assumption that emotions represent sets of interrelated affective, cognitive, motivational, and physiological/expressive components. We close this gap by evaluating extended AEQ-M scales, systematically assessing these components for five core mathematics emotions (enjoyment, anger, anxiety, hopelessness, boredom). Our work provides solid grounds for future research using the AEQ-M to assess emotions and their components in the domain of mathematics.

Tests in educational contexts often start with easy tasks, assuming that this fosters positive experiences--a sense of control, higher valuing of the test, and more positive and less negative emotions. Although intuitive and widespread, this assumption lacks an empirical basis and a theoretical framework. We conducted a field experiment and randomly assigned 208 students to an easy-to-difficult or a difficult-to-easy condition in a mathematics test. Perceived challenge was measured along with control appraisals, value appraisals, and emotions (enjoyment, pride, anxiety, anger, boredom). While students starting with easy tasks felt less challenged than students starting with difficult tasks in Part 1, no differences emerged regarding control and value appraisals and emotions. In Part 2, students who had started with easy tasks proceeded to difficult tasks and reported a higher level of challenge, less value and control, and less positive and more negative emotions than students who proceeded from difficult-to-easy tasks. Control and value appraisals mediated the differences between the two conditions, especially regarding positive emotions. These results cast doubt on the preference for easy-to-difficult over difficult-to-easy task orders, revealing their potential for causing adverse experiences at the end of the test (e.g., reflecting contrast effects).

Arguably, extreme sports athletes exhibit a more significant risk appetite than the general public. Are standard behavioral risk measures able to capture this? To answer this question, we assessed self-reports of risk taking and measured the risk-taking behavior of samples of snowboarders and climbers. Two groups of non-athletes, university students and crowdworkers, and athletes of a sport that does not include the potential of grave injury or death, esports athletes, serve as control conditions and complement our study. Across these five different groups, 1313 participants performed an online version of the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART) and gave self-reports of general willingness to take risks and sports-specific risk taking. Extreme sports athletes exhibited greater risk taking in the BART than non-athletes and esports athletes. Furthermore, BART-performance predicted sports-specific risk taking and its affective consequences. Our results speak to the BART's ecological validity and the unique role of physical consequences on risk-taking behavior., Author(s): Lucas Keller [sup.1] , Maik Bieleke [sup.2] , Wanja Wolff [sup.2] Author Affiliations: (1) grid.9811.1, 0000 0001 0658 7699, Department of Psychology, University of Konstanz, , Universitätsstr. 10, 78464, [...]

In the wake of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), social distancing is instrumental for containing the pandemic. To maximize its effectiveness, it is paramount to investigate psychological factors that predict adherence to social distancing guidelines and examine corresponding interventions. We focused on individual differences in if-then planning, self-control, and boredom, and tested an intervention based on if-then planning. We conducted a two-wave longitudinal study combining observational and experimental methods. Participants (N = 574, 35.7% female, age: M = 37.5 years, SD = 10.8) reported their adherence to social distancing guidelines and the perceived difficulty of adherence at T1, along with trait measures of if-then planning, self-control, and boredom. Afterwards, they were randomly assigned to an if-then planning intervention to increase adherence, or to a control intervention. One week later at T2, participants again reported their adherence and the perceived difficulty of adhering. Multiple regression and structural equation modeling were used to establish whether trait if-then planning, self-control, and boredom predicted adherence, and to examine the effects of the if-then planning intervention. Trait if-then planning, self-control, and boredom were associated with T1 adherence, while only if-then planning and boredom predicted T2 adherence. No overall treatment effect of the if-then planning intervention emerged; however, participants who complied with the intervention (75.6%) maintained higher levels of adherence over time than control participants. In sum, individual differences in if-then planning, self-control, and boredom predicted adherence to social distancing guidelines. If-then planning interventions are promising but require further steps to ascertain compliance., Author(s): Maik Bieleke [sup.1] , Corinna S. Martarelli [sup.2] , Wanja Wolff [sup.1] [sup.3] Author Affiliations: (1) grid.9811.1, 0000 0001 0658 7699, Department of Sport Science, University of Konstanz, , [...]

Studies on voters have shown that emotions are an important factor in politics. However, less is known about emotions experienced by adolescents in the context of civic education. Applying the control‐value theory to a cross‐curricular context, we analyze the relations between two types of emotions experienced in civic education and their antecedents and effects on learning: achievement emotions experienced during in‐class political discussions and epistemic emotions experienced during individual processing of political information in school. We hypothesized both types of emotions relate to control and value appraisal antecedents (e.g., internal political efficacy, personal importance). Further, we expected—depending on the specific emotion—positive or negative relations with academic outcomes (e.g., motivation, engagement, and knowledge). Data were collected with an online questionnaire in Austrian upper secondary schools with students (N = 594, Mage = 17.1) from grades 10 to 13. Bivariate latent correlations broadly support the expectations: We found mainly positive associations of antecedents and outcomes to enjoyment, hope, pride, curiosity, and surprise and negative associations to hopelessness, confusion, and boredom, but more complex correlation patterns for anxiety, anger, and shame. The results provide first insights into which emotions are experienced during political learning and underscore the importance of acknowledging the role of emotions in civic education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]