Search

Math anxiety is widely considered a potential barrier to success in STEM. Current thinking holds that math anxiety is directly linked to avoidance of and underperformance in STEM domains. However, past evidence supporting these claims is limited in important ways. Perhaps most crucially, it is possible that math anxiety predicts STEM outcomes merely as a proxy for poor math skills. Here, we tested the link between math anxiety and subsequent STEM outcomes by measuring math anxiety, math ability, and several covariates in 183 first-semester university students. We then tracked students’ STEM avoidance and achievement through four years at university via official academic transcripts. Results showed that math anxiety predicted both a reduction in how many STEM courses students took and, separately (i.e., controlling for one another), lower STEM grades. Crucially, these associations held after controlling for math ability (and other covariates). That math anxiety predicts math-related academic achievement independently of Math Ability suggests that, contrary to current thinking, math anxiety’s effects on academic performance likely operate via mechanisms other than negatively affecting math ability. Beyond this, we show evidence that math anxiety can account for associations between math ability and STEM outcomes, suggesting that past links between math ability and real-world outcomes may, in fact, be at least partially explainable by attitudes toward math. These findings provide clear impetus for developing and testing interventions that target math anxiety specifically and suggest that focusing on math ability without additional attention to math anxiety may fail to optimally boost STEM outcomes.

Current debate surrounds the promise of neuroscience for education, including whether learning-related neural changes can predict learning transfer better than traditional performance-based learning assessments. Longstanding debate in philosophy and psychology concerns the proposition that spatial processes underlie seemingly nonspatial/verbal reasoning (mental model theory). If so, education that fosters spatial cognition might improve verbal reasoning. Here, in a quasi-experimental design in real-world STEM classrooms, a curriculum devised to foster spatial cognition yielded transfer to improved verbal reasoning. Further indicating a spatial basis for verbal transfer, students’ spatial cognition gains predicted and mediated their reasoning improvement. Longitudinal fMRI detected learning-related changes in neural activity, connectivity, and representational similarity in spatial cognition–implicated regions. Neural changes predicted and mediated learning transfer. Ensemble modeling demonstrated better prediction of transfer from neural change than from traditional measures (tests and grades). Results support in-school “spatial education” and suggest that neural change can inform future development of transferable curricula.

Creative thinking drives progress not only in the arts but also, and perhaps especially, in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, and it is expected to become even more valuable than technical skill as artificial intelligence outpaces human cognition. Fostering creative thinkers has become a primary focus of educators. Educationally relevant anxieties, like math anxiety, have been shown to substantially impact specific forms of achievement and engagement, both in school and in career pursuits. Identifying these anxieties has led to promising interventions to enable affected individuals to reach their potential. Somewhat surprisingly, however, the possibility of anxiety specific to creative thinking is, to our knowledge, unexplored. In this article, across multiple samples, we tested the viability of creativity anxiety as a construct. We first created a new measure, the Creativity Anxiety Scale (CAS), demonstrating validity, internal reliability, and specificity. Applying the CAS revealed that creativity-specific anxiety predicted individual differences in creative achievement and attitudes toward creativity over and above effects of general anxiety. Moreover, across diverse content domains, from science to arts, anxiety was greater for situations that required creativity than similar situations that did not. Notably, this effect was especially pronounced in women. These findings suggest that creativity anxiety may have wide-reaching impacts and distinguish creativity anxiety from anxiety about noncreative aspects of performance. Establishing creativity anxiety as a novel construct, and the CAS as a valid measurement instrument, opens a new avenue of research that promises to deepen basic understanding of creative cognition and inform development of interventions to enable greater achievement of creative potential. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Assessing whether learning in one domain is transferable to abilities in other domains often eludes traditional testing. Thus, a question with bearing on the promise of neuroscience for education is whether neural changes that accompany in-school curriculum learning can improve prediction of learning transfer. Separately, debate in philosophy and psychology has long concerned whether spatial processes underlie seemingly nonspatial/verbal human reasoning (e.g., mental model theory; MMT). If so, education that fosters spatial cognition might yield transfer to improved verbal reasoning. Here, in real-world classrooms studied in a quasi-experimental design, a STEM curriculum devised to foster spatial cognition yielded improved spatial abilities and-consistent with MMT-transferred beyond the spatial domain to improved verbal reasoning. Further supporting MMT, the more students’ spatial ability improved, the more their verbal reasoning improved, and spatial ability improvement mediated curriculum transfer. At the neural level, longitudinal fMRI detected curriculum-driven changes in activity, connectivity, and representational similarity of brain regions implicated in spatial cognition. Critically, changes in spatial cognition-linked neural activity robustly predicted curriculum transfer-more accurately than testing and grades-and mediated this transfer. Reports by the National Research Council and others note that spatial abilities reliably predict STEM achievement, but that broad adoption of spatial cognition-focused curricula depends on classroom-based evidence of efficacy and mechanisms-of-change. The present findings support the real-world application of MMT to classrooms via “spatial education.” Further, demonstrating that in-school neural change can predict transfer over-and-above performance-based assessment suggests the long-term achievability of neurally-informed curriculum development that leverages neural change to identify and design transferable curricula.

Anxiety within the domains of math and spatial reasoning have consistently been shown to predict performance within those domains. However, little work has focused on how specific these associations are. Across two studies, we systematically tested the degree of specificity in relations between anxiety and performance within math and spatial reasoning. Results consistently showed that anxiety within a cognitive domain predicted performance in that domain even when controlling for other forms of anxiety, providing evidence that cognition-specific anxieties are valuable for understanding cognition-specific performance. We also found that general trait anxiety did not explain a significant portion the anxiety-performance link in either math or spatial reasoning, suggesting that these anxiety-performance associations are not due to the propensity to feel anxious generally. Interestingly, while spatial anxiety did not explain any of the anxiety-performance association in math, math anxiety did explain a significant portion of the anxiety-performance link in spatial reasoning. These results suggest that, while links between anxiety and performance cannot be reduced to a single underlying general anxiety construct, there may nevertheless be overlap between domain anxieties. We end by calling for a more detailed examination of the unique and shared mechanisms linking anxiety and performance across disparate cognitive domains.

Much of creativity research has focused on the constructs of divergent and convergent thinking. In this review, we address key gaps in extant empirical understanding of these constructs and offer suggestions for future research to parse their respective contributions to creative cognition. Furthermore, we consider the construct validity of the psychometric tasks most commonly used to measure these types of thinking: The Alternative Uses Task and the Remote Associates Test. We underscore that, although these tasks frequently are used to assay these constructs separately, they actually involve mixtures of the two constructs together. We conclude that additional measurement development and factor analytic research is necessary to delineate the separability and interdependence of divergent and convergent thinking as components of creativity.

While a recent upsurge in the application of neuroimaging methods to creative cognition has yielded encouraging progress toward understanding the neural underpinnings of creativity, the neural basis of barriers to creativity are as yet unexplored. Here, we report the first investigation into the neural correlates of one such recently identified barrier to creativity: anxiety specific to creative thinking, or creativity anxiety (Daker et al., 2019). We employed a machine-learning technique for exploring relations between functional connectivity and behavior (connectome-based predictive modeling; CPM) to investigate the functional connections underlying creativity anxiety. Using whole-brain resting-state functional connectivity data, we identified a network of connections or “edges” that predicted individual differences in creativity anxiety, largely comprising connections within and between regions of the executive and default networks and the limbic system. We then found that the edges related to creativity anxiety identified in one sample generalize to predict creativity anxiety in an independent sample. We additionally found evidence that the network of edges related to creativity anxiety were largely distinct from those found in previous work to be related to divergent creative ability (Beaty et al., 2018). In addition to being the first work on the neural correlates of creativity anxiety, this research also included the development of a new Chinese-language version of the Creativity Anxiety Scale, and demonstrated that key behavioral findings from the initial work on creativity anxiety are replicable across cultures and languages.