216

Interactive Effects ofAchievement Anxiety, AcademicAchievement, and Instructional

Mode on Performanceand Course Attitudes

The study focused on the interactive effects of achievement anxiety, academic achievement,and instructional mode on performance and course attitudes. A second concern of the studywas to ascertain the differential effect of instructional mode on achievement anxiety ofsubgroups of students enrolled in an undergraduate clothing design course.

Multivariate analysis of variance (MANO VA) was used to assess the interactive effects ofachievement anxiety, cumulative point-hour ratio (CPHR), and instructional mode on (a) twotests designed to measure knowledge and application of course content and (b) a course at-titude scale. There were no significant interactions nor main effects. However, there wasevidence that for the students with low CPHR and initially high debilitative anxiety, the TVlecture-supervised laboratory mode provided a learning environment more facilitating in

regard to achievement anxiety than the independent study mode.(Home Economics Research Journal, January 1980, Vol. 8, No. 3)

Carolyn Callis and Lois E. Dickey

The educational environment can producea range of affective and academic responses.At one end of the continuum, students maygain prestige and self-satisfaction when theirperformance is superior. At the other end ofthe continuum when students are confronted

with the threat of failure, anxiety may result.Are these affective responses and academicoutcomes associated? The present studyfocused on the interactive effects of com-

ponents of the educational environment onstudents’ academic and nonacademic out-

comes.

The influence of anxiety on performance iswell documented. McKeachie (1958, pp.580-584) concluded from research on anxietyand test performance that anxiety duringclassroom examinations may accelerate to

such a point that it interferes with memoryand problem solving. He cautioned that toomuch emphasis can be placed on student

Authors’ addresses: Carolyn Callis, Department ofHome Economics, The University of Texas-Austin,Austin 78712; Lois E. Dickey, Department of Textilesand Clothing, School of Home Economics, The OhioState University, Columbus 43210.

The authors wish to thank Dr. Lena Bailey,Chairperson of Home Economics Education, andDr. Joan Gritzmacher, Professor of the Schoolof Home Economics, The Ohio State University.

217

motivation. Alpert and Haber (1960) theo-rized that two kinds of anxiety responses arepresent in testing situations, those whichfacilitate performance and those which in-

terfere with performance. They constructedan anxiety scale to measure the extent of anx-iety a person experiences in academic test

situations and the direction of the exper-ienced anxiety, whether facilitative or

debilitative.Researchers (Gaudry and Spielberger,

1971; Mandler and Sarason, 1952; Munz andSmouse, 1968) have also considered the in-fluence of testing procedures on the relation-ship between anxiety and academic perfor-mance. Mandler and Sarason (1952, pp.166-173) suggested that the presence of anx-iety in the testing situation is an importantvariable in test performance.

Another concern of researchers (Allen,Giat, and Cherney, 1974; Ripple, Millman,and Glock, 1969; Tobias, 1973) has been therelationship between anxiety and achieve-ment in various types of learning situations.While individualized instruction is assumed toalleviate anxiety to a greater extent thantraditional lecture courses, the findings of re-cent studies (Allen et al. , 1974; Dowaliby andSchumer, 1973; Jacko, 1974) suggest the needto determine whether type of instructionalmode influences academic performance ofstudents having high and low academicachievement and achievement anxiety.There is no strong evidence for preferring

one teaching method over another as far asperformance on course examinations is con-cerned. However, evidence is available that

teaching methods do make a difference whenthe educational goals are retention, appli-cation, problem solving, attitude change,and motivation for continued learning(McKeachie, 1970). One of the more im-

pressive aspects of Personalized System of In-struction (PSI) courses is the high ratings thecourses receive from students. The superiority

of PSI courses over traditional modes of in-struction with respect to student attitudestoward instruction has been established in anumber of studies (Born and Herbert, 1971;Born, Gledhill, and Davis, 1972; Hastings,1972; Sheppard and MacDermot, 1970; Wit-ters and Kent, 1972).The proposition that learning is an in-

dividual matter suggests that no one instruc-tional approach matches the learning style ofall students. Therefore, evidence is neededrelative to the differential effectiveness of in-structional modes utilized with students

possessing different characteristics. Suchevidence is prerequisite to designing instruc-tional experiences for learners that will notonly promote optimal achievement but alsofoster positive attitudes toward instruction.The current study was an attempt to altersystematically selected aspects of the educa-tional environment and to assess the effects onacademic and nonacademic outcomes.

Purpose of the StudyThere were three purposes in the study.

The first was to investigate the effects ofachievement anxiety, prior academic achieve-ment, and the instructional mode on student

performance and course attitudes. The sec-ond was to investigate the differential effec-tiveness of instructional mode on achievement

anxiety of subjects with low academicachievement records. The third was to in-

vestigate the differential effectiveness of in-structional mode on achievement anxiety ofsubjects who initially had achievement anx-iety scores that reflected a debilitative effectrather than a facilitative effect on perfor-mance.

Method

The sample included 92 female homeeconomics majors enrolled in an under-

graduate Clothing: Design Analysis course

218

during two successive quarters. A quasi-i ~ - oxio

d .experimental design oxlo

was used since~ °

OX20random assignment of subjects was not pos-sible. Thus, the groups were studied intactwhich placed limitations on interpretationand generalization of the findings. However,the contention of near-equivalency of the twogroups on relevant variables was supported bypre-treatment scores on the Clothing DesignUnit Test, cumulative point-hour ratio

(CPHR), achievement anxiety, and course at-titudes.

TreatmentThe 46 students enrolled in the course dur-

ing fall quarter received instruction twice aweek via televised lectures. Six hours of labo-

ratory experience under the supervision of thecourse instructor were also scheduled eachweek. The 46 students enrolled during winterquarter worked independently in a mediatedself-instructional laboratory during the De-sign Unit. A two-hour interaction period wasscheduled each week for the analysis of

clothing design problems. The instructor wasavailable for individual assistance for four ad-ditional hours each week. Course content wasthe same for the two groups; however, a vari-

ety of instructional media was provided in theself-instructional laboratory. The studentsselected instructional materials that they feltwould facilitate attainment of the instruc-tional goals.

Data CollectionThe data were gathered prior to, and fol-

lowing, a four-week Design Unit in an under-graduate clothing design course. The unit wasthe second of the three units in the course.The evaluative instruments included the

Achievement Anxiety Test (Alpert andHaber, 1960) to measure anxiety; two mea-sures of knowledge and application of coursecontent, a Clothing Design Unit Test and a

Clothing Design Exercise; the Purdue RatingScale for Instruction (Remmers and Elliot,1950) to assess course attitudes; and CPHR asthe measure of academic achievement.

Since data were not available as to whetherthe Achievement Anxiety Test (AAT) was avalid measure for home economics students,data were obtained. The validity of the AATwas established with home economics stu-

dents comparable in age and academic back-ground to those in the sample. Construct

validity of the AAT was assessed utilizing cor-relation of AAT scale scores with the TotalPositive score on the Tennessee Self ConceptScale (Fitts, 1964). A positive correlation be-tween the facilitative anxiety scores on theAAT and the Tennessee Self Concept Scale(TSCS) and a negative correlation betweenthe debilitative anxiety scores on the AATand the TSCS were anticipated. A PearsonCorrelation coefficient of .88 (p < .001) wasfound between TSCS scores and scores on thefacilitative scale of the AAT (n = 22). ThePearson r for the TSCS and debilitative scalescores of the AAT was - .67 (p < .001).Thus, these correlations provided some sup-port for the construct validity of the AAT.

Test-retest and item-total correlations forthe AAT were also computed. Pearson cor-relation coefficients for the pretest and post-test facilitative and debilitative scale scores

(n = 22) were as follows: for the facilitativescale, r = .88, p < .001; for the debilitative

scale, r = .53, p < .006. Alpert and Haber(1960, p. 213) reported test-retest reliabilitiesfor a 10-week interval of .83 for the facilita-tive scale and .87 for the debilitative scale.Item-total correlations (n = 22) were com-puted by the researchers. The Kuder Rich-ardson (Formula 8) Reliability Coefficientsfor the debilitative and facilitative scales

were, respectively, .90 and .84. Thus, theAAT reliabilities were considered to be satis-

factory. ’

The Clothing Design Unit Test, a 24-item

219

multiple choice test, was developed to mea-sure knowledge of flat pattern design prin-ciples. Content validity of the items in theoriginal test version was judged by three tex-tiles and clothing faculty members and the re-searcher. The test was pretested with twogroups of students who had previously com-pleted the course (nl - 8, n2 = 34). Re-visions in the test were made based upon theresults of item analyses. The mean item diffi-culty of the final test version was .44 and themean discrimination was .25. The Kuder-Richardson (Formula 20) Reliability Coeffi-cient was .58.The Clothing Design Exercise was de-

veloped to measure the students’ ability to ap-ply concepts and principles learned in theunit to the solution of the clothing designproblem. The exercise required the studentsto analyze a sketched garment design and toprepare the pattern pieces for the design froma basic sloper pattern. Three dress designs,judged by three textiles and clothing facultymembers and the researcher as being equiv-alent with respect to the pattern manipula-tions required in completing the design prob-lem, were randomly assigned to the studentsin the TV lecture-supervised laboratory andthe independent study groups. The ClothingDesign Exercise was scored by the course in-structor and thus constituted a portion of thecourse mid-term grade. However, the

Clothing Design Exercise was independentlyscored by two graduate students in textilesand clothing for the purpose of the research.The interrater agreement, based on total

scores for two garment designs evaluated dur-ing a pretesting session, was 96 percent and 97percent, respectively. An average of the twojudges’ scores constituted the score for the

Clothing Design Exercise.The Purdue Rating Scale for Instruction

(Remmers and Elliott, 1950) purportedlymeasures the students’ judgments of the in-structor and the course on the 26 traits of the

scale. According to the manual (Remmersand Weisbrodt, 1964), the 26 items in thescale have been chosen from among varioussources as being among the most importantcontributors to the &dquo;generalized attitude&dquo;toward instruction. Reliability coefficients forthe 26 items are reported in the manual

(Remmer and Weisbrodt, 1964, pp. 3-5) fortwo different samples of instructors (n, =205, n2 = 114). Median reliability coeffi-cients (modified split-half technique) for the26 items for the two samples were, respec-tively, .87 and .83. These values comparefavorably with the reliabilities of frequentlyused psychological instruments.

Data AnalysisA three-way multivariate analysis of vari-

ance (MANOVA) was used to analyze the ef-fect of instructional mode together withachievement anxiety and academic achieve-ment on knowledge and application of coursecontent and on course attitudes. The studentswithin the TV lecture-supervised laboratoryand independent study modes were dividedinto two CPHR levels (high and low); then,within each CPHR level, they were furtherdivided into two achievement anxiety levels(high F-D and low F-D1 ).A one-way analysis of covariance was uti-

lized to ascertain the effect of instructionalmode on end-of-unit achievement anxiety oflow CPHR subjects. The initial anxiety scoreserved as the covariate.The effect of instructional mode on end-of-

unit achievement anxiety of initially low F-Danxiety subjects was analyzed using a one-wayanalysis of covariance. The initial anxietyscore served as the covariate.

1The AAT measures the presence of two kinds of anxietyresponses, those which facilitate performance and those whichinterfere with it. Combining the facilitative and debilitativescores (F-D) leads to a significant increase in the successfulprediction of academic performance scores (Alpert and Haber,1960, p. 215).

220

TABLE 1

Post.treatment mean scores and standard deviations on the Clothing Design Unit Test, ClothingDesign Exercise, and Attitude Scale by instructional mode.

TABLE 2

Post.treatment mean scores and standard deviations on the Clothing Design Unit Test, ClothingDesign Exercise, and Attitude Scale for the levels of CPHRI and achievement anxiety2 according to

instructional mode.3

221

Results

Post-treatment scores and standard devia-tions on the Clothing Design Unit Test, Cloth-ing Design Exercise, and Purdue Rating Scalefor Instruction for the two instructionalmodes are presented in Table 1. Cell meansand standard deviations for the dependentvariables are presented in Table 2.The data on the three dependent variables

were analyzed using a three-factor multi-variate analysis of variance (MANOVA)design. The results of the comparison of thecentroids of the two groups with respect to the

dependent variables are summarized in Table3. In Table 3 it may be observed that none ofthe three main effects of instructional mode,CPHR, and initial anxiety was significant.

Likewise, none of the four interaction effectsapproached significance.

Results of subsequent univariate F tests re-vealed a significant main effect of CPHR forthe Clothing Design Unit Test scores (F =4.65; df = 1/84; p < .03). High CPHR sub-jects outperformed low CPHR subjects on theClothing Design Unit Test irrespective of in-structional mode (£1 = 13.63, X2 = 11.90).Thus, with respect to grade-point average,this finding is in agreement with general re-search findings. High grade-point averagesubjects have generally been found to per-form well under different instructional modes

(Bigelow and Egbert, 1968, pp. 37-39; Doty,1967, pp. 363-365).

Students in the independent study modeoutperformed students in the TV lecture-

TABLE 2 (continued)

222

TABLE 3

Summary of the MANOVA results on thedependent variables of Clothing Design Unittest scores, Clothing Design Exercise scores,

and Course Attitude scores.

supervised laboratory mode on the ClothingDesign Unit Test. The difference in mean

scores, however, was not statistically signifi-cant. In numerous comparative studies,students enrolled in PSI and independentstudy sections of courses have been shown toscore higher on course examinations thanstudents in the lecture sections of the course

(Born et al., 1972; Cooper and Greiner, 1971;Hartnett and Stewart, 1966; Hastings, 1972;Jacko, 1974; Johnston and Pennypacker,1971; McMichael and Corey, 1969; Moore,Hauck, and Gagne, 1973; Morris and Kim-brell, 1972; Sheppard and MacDermot,1970).The findings regarding anxiety were con-

trary to expectations. Low F-D anxiety sub-jects scored higher on the Clothing DesignUnit Test than high F-D anxiety subjects. Thefindings for the current study with respect toCPHR and anxiety both support and con-tradict findings by Jacko (1974) where highgrade-point average (GPA) and high F-Danxiety were associated with higher achieve-ment scores than were low GPA and low F-D

anxiety. It may be conjectured that the threat

of failure was reduced in the present study byinforming students that their responses on theachievement tests would in no way affect theircourse grades, thereby facilitating rather thansuppressing performance of low F-D anxietysubjects. In numerous studies of the relation-ship between anxiety and achievement, highanxiety has been shown to be associated withlow criterion scores (Mandler and Sarason,1952; Ripple, Millman, and Glock, 1969;Sarason, 1961; West, Lee, and Anderson,1969).

Neither the main effects nor the interac-tions for the Clothing Design Exercise scoreswere significant. In Figure 1, the dissimilar

patterns for high F-D and low F-D lines in-dicate that high F-D anxiety was not as-

sociated with the higher scores on the

Clothing Design Exercise in every situation.In the independent study mode, low F-D anx-iety/low CPHR subjects outscored high F-Danxiety/low CPHR subjects. Conversely, inthe TV lecture-supervised laboratory mode,high F-D anxiety/low CPHR subjects out-

performed low F-D anxiety/low CPHR sub-jects.

McKeachie (1958, pp. 580-584) suggestedthat anxiety during classroom examinationsmay accelerate to such a point that it inter-feres with memory and problem solving. It

may be argued that the achievement anxietyoperative in the instructional environmentserved to suppress scores of low F-D anxietysubjects on the Clothing Design Exercise in asituation where the results contributed to thecourse grade. On the other hand, informinglow F-D anxiety subjects that the results onthe Clothing Design Unit Test would not af-fect their course grades may have reduced thedebilitative effects of achievement anxiety.Likewise, the results are consistent with DriveTheory from which the prediction is madethat high drive produces debilitating effects

223

on difficult tasks where error tendencies are

strong (Leherissey, O’Neil, and Hansen,1971, pp. 413-420.

Sarason (1959, pp. 272-275), in a study ofthe intellectual and personality correlates oftest anxiety, found a negative correlation be-tween anxiety and grade-point average. Thisnegative correlation between anxiety andGPA reportedly approached a zero correla-tion as a function of years in college. The im-plication seems to be that when students aregiven time to adapt to perceived threateningsituations, anxiety reactions may extinguish.

In the present study, the experimental unitwas the second unit of study. Thus, the stu-dents had already experienced some degree ofsuccess or failure in the course. Theoretically,at least, students had time to adapt to anyperceived threatening situations prior to datacollection.

Neither the main effects nor the interac-tions approached statistical significance forcourse attitudes. As depicted in Figure 2, thedissimilar patterns for high F-D and low F-Dlines indicate that high F-D anxiety was notassociated with the more positive course at-

Clothing Design Exercise mean scores for the levels of instructional mode, CPHR, and initial AAT(ni = 46, n2 = 46).

224

titude score in every situation. Again, as wasthe case for the Clothing Design Exercise

scores, the mean attitude score for the lowF-D anxiety/low CPHR subjects in the in-

dependent study mode exceeded the mean at-titude score for the high F-D anxiety/lowCPHR subjects.A comparison of attitude score means

(Table 1) for the two groups reveals an advan-tage, though not enough to be statisticallysignificant, in favor of the independent studymode. In a number of studies, researchershave reported more favorable course attitudesamong students enrolled in PSI I and pro-grammed courses than in lecture courses

(Born and Herbert, 1971; Born et al., 1972;Hastings, 1972; Lloyd and Knutzen, 1969;McMichael and Corey, 1969; Morris andKimbrell, 1972; Sheppard and MacDermot,1970; Witters and Kent, 1972).The second area of concern was in regard

to the effect of instructional mode on the

post-treatment achievement anxiety of lowCPHR subjects. A one-way analysis ofcovariance was utilized in examining the post-treatment achievement anxiety scores of lowCPHR subjects. The covariate was the pre-treatment score on the AAT.The adjusted achievement anxiety mean

scores appear in Table 4. With respect to

FIGURE 2

Course attitude mean scores for the levels of instructional mode, CPHR, and initial AAT (n1 = 46,

225

association with more facilitative end-of-unitF-D anxiety scores for low CPHR subjects, theadvantage was with the TV lecture-supervisedlaboratory mode. However, the advantagewas not great enough to reach significance(F = .3741; df = 1/44; p < .54).The final area of concern was in regard to

the effect of instructional mode on post-treatment achievement anxiety scores of in-itially low F-D anxiety subjects. A one-wayanalysis of covariance was utilized in examin-ing the post-treatment achievement anxietyscores of initially low F-D anxiety subjects.The covariate was the pretreatment score onthe AAT.As may be seen in Table 5, the adjusted

mean scores reflect a more facilitative end-of-unit F-D anxiety score for initially low F-Danxiety subjects in the TV lecture-supervisedlaboratory mode than in the independentstudy mode. However, the advantage was notenough to be statistically significant (F = .02;df = 1/45; p < .89).

Discussion and ImplicationsThe tendency for independent study

students to outperform the TV lecture-

supervised laboratory students helps to ex-

TABLE 4

Achievement anxiety mean scores for theone-way analysis of covariance of low CPH R

subjects by instructional mode.

plain the lack of significant interactions

among the independent variables. Never-

theless, the mode X achievement anxiety in-teraction for a reduced sample (top 25 per-cent and bottom 25 percent) on the ClothingDesign Exercise approached significance(p < .06). Thus, future researchers may con-firm that test performance varies as a func-tion of anxiety level and instructional mode.Likewise, the mode X CPHR interaction for areduced sample on course attitudes ap-proached significance (pb < .08). In futurestudies, researchers may be able to conformthat course attitudes of subjects differing onCPHR vary as a function of instructionalmode.

There was some evidence that students’

knowledge that test results would or wouldnot affect course grades differentially in-

fluenced their performance on the two

achievement tests. In general, low F-D anx-iety types outperformed high F-D anxietytypes when the students were told that the testresults would not affect their course grades.In a situation where test performance con-tributed to the course grade, high F-D anxietystudents tended to outperform low F-D anx-iety students. It appears that studies of the ef-fects of achievement anxiety on academicperformance would be more effectivelyaccomplished by having the classroom

TABLE 5

Achievement anxiety mean scores for the one-way analysis of covariance of initially low F-D

anxiety subjects by instructional mode.-----

226

teacher administer the anxiety questionnaireto students prior to classroom examinations asa measurement of within-task anxiety.Another alternative in research situationswould be to desensitize the students followinga testing session. Both of these approachesseem preferable to informing students thattest results will have no bearing on academicassessment.

The results of the study suggest the need forfurther research relative to (a) variables in-vestigated in the study, and (b) othervariables which should be explored. Similarstudies utilizing randomization of subjectswith male and female subjects and across sub-ject matter disciplines would be beneficial.Since males and females have been shown toscore differently on the AAT, sex differenceswith respect to anxiety and achievementmotivation should be investigated. The per-tinence of research relative to sex differenceson anxiety and achievement motivation isunderscored by the enrollment of increasingnumbers of males in college clothing courses.

Other variables that should be studied in-clude locus of control and the amount of in-structional support which optimizes perform-ance of subjects with differing learner

characteristics. The usefulness of the locus ofcontrol variable in predicting academic out-come has been suggested by findings of Allenet al. (1974, pp. 968-973). They concludedthat internal subjects may maintain a con-stant level of performance regardless of in-structional format. However, the achieve-ment of external subjects declined sharply ina course which stressed student control of

contingencies. If further research should

verify that internal subjects progress morerapidly and accrue more benefits from a

semiautonomous self-paced instructional

mode, educators would likely gain greater ad-ministrative and financial support for pro-viding this type of learner option.

Level of prior academic achievement is avariable which has been utilized by educatorsfor many purposes, including homogeneousgrouping and to establish the starting pointwithin an individualized curricular sequence.Tobias (1976, pp. 61-74) has hypothesizedthat the higher the level of prior achievement,the lower the instructional support requiredto accomplish instructional objectives. Con-versely, the lower the level of prior achieve-ment, the higher the level of instructional

support must be to accomplish instructionalobjectives. Adequate experimental support isyet to be demonstrated for this hypothesis.

In conclusion, the results of the study sug-gest that if learners are given adequate oppor-tunity to choose from among a rich variety ofeducational experiences, they will likely selectthose activities that will facilitate their attain-ment of the instructional goals. The insightthat such learner decisions can provide withrespect to optimizing academic and non-

academic outcomes should not be overlooked

by researchers in the future.

References

Allen, J., Giat, L., and Cherney, R. J. Locus of control,test anxiety and student performance in a personal-ized instruction course. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 1974, 66, 968-973.

Alpert, R., and Haber, R. N. Anxiety in academicachievement situations. Journal of Abnormal andSocial Psychology, 1960, 61, 207-215.

Bigelow, G. S., and Egbert, R. L. Personality factorsand independent study. The Journal of EducationalResearch, 1968, 62, 37-39.

Born, D. G., Gledhill, S. M., and Davis, M. L. Examin-ation performance in lecture-discussion and per-sonalized instruction courses. Journal of AppliedBehavior Analysis, 1972, 5, 33-43.

Born, D. G., and Herbert, E. W. A further study ofpersonalized instruction for students in large univer-sity classes. The Journal of Experimental Education,1971, 40, 6-11.

227

Cooper, J. L., and Greiner, J. M. Contingency manage-ment in an introductory psychology course producesbetter retention. The Psychological Record, 1971, 21,391-400.

Doty, B. A. Teaching method effectiveness in relationto certain student characteristics. The Journal ofEducational Research, 1967, 60, 363-365.

Dowaliby, F. J., and Schumer, H. Teacher-centeredversus student-centered mode of college classroom in-struction as related to manifest anxiety. Journal ofEducational Psychology, 1973, 64, 125-132.

Fitts, W. H. Tennessee Self Concept Scale. Nashville,Tennessee: Counselor Recordings and Tests, 1964.

Gaudry, E., and Spielberger, C. D. Anxiety and Educa-tional Achievement. New York: John Wiley, 1971.

Hartnett, R. T., and Stewart, C. T. Final examination

grades of independent study students compared withthose of students taught by traditional methods. TheJournal of Educational Research, 1966, 59, 356-357.

Hastings, G. R. Independent learning based on be-havioral objectives. The Journal of EducationalResearch, 1972, 65, 411-416.

Jacko, E. J. Lecture instruction versus a personalizedsystem of instruction: Effects on individuals with dif-

fering achievement anxiety and academic achieve-ment. (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Ten-nessee, Knoxville) Ann Arbor, Mich.: UniversityMicrofilms, 1974, No. 74-27, 211.

Johnston, J. M., and Pennypacker, H. S. A behavioralapproach to college teaching. American Psychologist,1971, 26, 219-244.

Leherissey, B. L., O’Neil, H. F. , Jr. , and Hansen, D. N.Effects of memory support on state anxiety and per-formance in computer-assisted learning. Journal ofEducational Psychology, 1971, 62, 413-420.

Lloyd, K. E., and Knutzen, N. J. A self-paced pro-grammed undergraduate course in the experimentalanalysis of behavior. Journal of Applied BehaviorAnalysis, 1969, 2, 125-133.

Mandler, G., and Sarason, S. B. A study of anxiety andlearning. Journal of A bnormal and Social Psychology,1952, 47, 166-173.

McKeachie, W. J. Research on College Teaching: A Re-view. Report 6. Washington, D.C.: ERIC Clear-

inghouse on Higher Education, 1970.McKeachie, W. J. Students, groups, and teaching

methods. American Psychologist, 1958, 13, 580-584.McMichael, J. S., and Corey, J. R. Contingency man-agement in an introductory psychology course pro-duces better learning. Journal of Applied BehaviorAnalysis, 1969, 2, 79-83.

Moore, J. W., Hauck, W. E., and Gagne, E. D. Acqui-sition, retention, and transfer in an individualized

college physics course. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 1973, 64, 335-340.Morris, C. J., and Kimbrell, G. McA. Performanceand attitudinal effects on the Keller method in an in-

troductory psychology course. The PsychologicalRecord, 1972, 22, 523-530.

Munz, D. C., and Smouse, A. D. Interaction effectsof item-difficulty sequence and achievement-anxietyreaction on academic performance. Journal ofEducational Psychology, 1968, 59, 370-374.

Remmers, H. H., and Elliott, D. N. The Purdue RatingScale for Instruction. West Lafayette, Indiana: ThePurdue Research Foundation, Purdue University,1950.

Remmers, H. H., and Weisbrodt, J. A. Manual ofInstructions for the Purdue Rating Scale for Instruc-tion. West Lafayette, Indiana: University Bookstore,1964.

Ripple, R. E., Millman, J. , and Glock, M. D. Learnercharacteristics and instructional mode: A search fordisordinal interactions. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 1969, 60, 113-120.Sarason, I. G. Intellectual and personality correlates

of test anxiety. Journal of Abnormal and Social

Psychology, 1959, 59, 272-275.Sarason, I. G. Test anxiety and the intellectual perfor-mance of college students. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 1961, 52, 201-206.

Sheppard, W. C., and MacDermot, H. G. Design andevaluation of a programmed course in introductorypsychology. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,1970, 3, 5-11.

Tobias, S. Distraction, response mode, anxiety, andachievement in computer assisted instruction. Journalof Educational Psychology, 1973, 65, 233-237.

Tobias, S. Achievement treatment interactions. Review

of Educational Research, 1976, 46, 61-74.West, C. K., Lee, J. F., and Anderson, T. H. The in-

fluence of test anxiety on the selection of relevantfrom irrelevant information. The Journal of Educa-tional Research, 1969, 63, 51-52.

Witters, D. R., and Kent, G. W. Teaching without lec-turing : Evidence in the case for individualized in-

struction. The Psychological Record, 1972, 22,169-175.

Received August 29, 1978; accepted March 22, 1979.