Little more than personality: Dispositional determinants of test anxiety (the Big Five, core self-evaluations, and self-assessed intelligence)

Tools

Chamorro-Premuzic, Tomas; Ahmetoglu, Gorkan and Furnham, Adrian. 2008. Little more than personality: Dispositional determinants of test anxiety (the Big Five, core self-evaluations, and self-assessed intelligence). Learning and Individual Differences, 18(2), pp. 258-263. ISSN 10416080 [Article]

No full text available

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2007.09.002

Abstract or Description

This study attempted a hierarchical integration of several dispositional determinants of test anxiety (TA) [Sarason, I.G. (1984). Stress, anxiety and cognitive interference: Reactions to tests. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 929–938.], namely the Big Five personality traits [Costa, P.T. Jr., & McCrae, R.R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO five-factor inventory (NEO-FFI): Professional manual. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources.], core self-evaluations (CSE) [Judge, T.A., Erez, A., Bono, J.E., & Thoreson, C.J. (2003). The Core Self-Evaluation Scale: Development of a measure. Personnel psychology, 56, 303–331.], and self-assessed intelligence (SAI) [Furnham, A. (2001). Self-estimates of intelligence: Culture and gender difference in self and other estimates of both general (g) and multiple intelligences. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 1381–1405.] in a sample of 388 US and UK university students. Structural equation models showed that TA was largely a function of Neuroticism, and that CSE and SAI do not contribute to the prediction of TA over established personality traits. Furthermore, the relationship between CSE and TA was fully accounted for by personality traits, whereas SAI was not a significant predictor of TA. The results undermine the notion that self-beliefs affect TA and suggest that wider dispositions play a salient role determining individual differences in TA. Theoretical and applied implications are discussed, particularly in regards to educational settings.

Item Type:

Article

Identification Number (DOI):

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2007.09.002