State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children

Transcription

1 Permission for Kristen Beckler to reproduce 1 copy within one year of May 6, 2010 State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children Sampler Set Manual, Test Booklet and Scoring Key How I Feel Questionnaire Professional Manual Developed by Charles D. Spielberger, Ph.D. in collaboration with R.L. Gorsuch, R. Lushene, P.R. Vagg, and G.A. Jacobs Published by Mind Garden, Inc. info@mindgarden.com Copyright 1973 Mind Garden, Inc. All rights reserved. This manual may not be reproduced in any form without written permission of the publisher, Mind Garden, Inc. Mind Garden is a trademark of Mind Garden, Inc.

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. DESCRIPTION ADMINISTRATION SCORING... 1 Description... 1 Administration... 2 Scoring the STAIC... 4 II. DEVELOPMENT AND NORMS... 6 Development... 6 Norms for the STAIC... 7 Table 1. Means and Standard Deviations... 8 Table 2. Standard Scores Table 3. Percentile Ranks III. RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY Reliability Table 4. Test-Retest Reliability Coefficients p Table 5. Item Remainder Correlation Coefficients Validity Table 6. Mean Scores on S-Anxiety Items Correlations with Other Scales Table 7. Correlations of T-Anxiety Scale with Measures of Aptitude and Achievement Current Research with the STAIC Notes IV. REFERENCES V. APPENDICES Appendix A: Biblography of Research with the STAIC Appendix B: Foreign Language Adaptations/Translations of the STAIC TEST BOOKLET: "How I Feel Questionnaire" SCORING KEY... 46

3 DESCRIPTION I. DESCRIPTION ADMINISTRATION SCORING The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children (STAIC) was initially developed as a research tool for the study of anxiety in elementary school children. It is comprised of separate, self-report scales for measuring two distinct anxiety concepts: state anxiety (S-Anxiety) and trait anxiety (T-Anxiety). The STAIC is similar in conception and structure to the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) which provides measures of anxiety for adolescents and adults (Spielberger, Gorsuch, & Lushene, 1970). While especially constructed to measure anxiety in nine- to twelve-year old children, the STAIC may also be used with younger children with average or above reading ability and with older children who are below average in ability. The STAIC S-Anxiety scale consists of 20 statements that ask children how they feel at a particular moment in time. The STAIC T-Anxiety scale also consists of 20 item statements, but subjects respond to these items by indicating how they generally feel. Individual STAIC items are similar in content to those included in the STAI, but the format for responding to the STAIC has been simplified to facilitate its use with young children. The STAIC S-Anxiety and T-Anxiety scales are printed on opposite sides of a single-page Test Form. The S-Anxiety scale is designated C-1; the T-Anxiety scale is designated C-2. The S-Anxiety scale is designed to measure transitory anxiety states, that is, subjective, consciously perceived feelings of apprehension, tension, and worry that vary in intensity and fluctuate over time. The T-Anxiety scale measures relatively stable individual differences in anxiety proneness, that is, differences between children in the tendency to experience anxiety states. High T-Anxiety children are more prone to respond to situations perceived as threatening with elevations in S-Anxiety intensity than low T-Anxiety children. Elevations in S-Anxiety are normally evoked in children exposed to stressful situations. In general, children who are higher in T-Anxiety experience S-Anxiety elevations more frequently and with greater intensity than low T-Anxiety children because they perceive a wider range of circumstances as dangerous or threatening. Situations in which failure is experienced, or in which personal adequacy is evaluated are more likely to be perceived as threatening by a high T-Anxiety child, but whether children who differ in T-Anxiety will show corresponding differences in S-Anxiety depends upon the extent to which a specific situation is perceived as dangerous or threatening by a particular child, and this is greatly influenced by the child's past experience. Investigators may use the STAIC S-Anxiety scale to determine the actual levels of S-Anxiety intensity induced by stressful experimental procedures, or as an index of drive level (D) as this concept is defined by Hull (1943) and Spence -1-

4 (1958). The S-Anxiety scale should also prove useful as an indicator of the level of transitory anxiety experienced by children in counseling and psychotherapy situations, and, especially, as a measure of the effectiveness of desensitization and counter conditioning procedures in behavior therapy. The STAIC T-Anxiety scale may be used for research purposes to select children who vary in anxiety proneness or as an experimental screening device for detecting neurotic behavioral tendencies in elementary school children. The T- Anxiety scale should also prove useful as a measure of the effectiveness of clinical treatment procedures designed to reduce neurotic anxiety in children. The theoretical conception of anxiety that guided the construction of the STAIC is considered in greater detail by Spielberger (1966, 1971, 1972a, 1972b). For validity studies and background information about the test construction strategy and procedures that influenced the development of the STAIC, the Test Manual for the STAI should be consulted (Spielberger, et al., 1970). ADMINISTRATION The STAIC was designed to be self-administering and has no time limits. It may be given either individually or in groups. Complete instructions are printed on the Test Form for both the S-Anxiety and T-Anxiety scales. Fourth, fifth, and sixthgrade children generally require only 8 to 12 minutes to complete either the S- Anxiety or the T-Anxiety scale, and less than 20 minutes to complete both. Repeated administrations of the S-Anxiety scale typically require 5 to 7 minutes or less. Many of the STAIC items have face validity as measures of "anxiety," but the examiner should not use this term in administering the inventory. In talking about the STAIC, the examiner should consistently refer to the inventory and its sub-scales as the "How-I-Feel-Questionnaire," the title that is printed on the test form. Since the validity of the STAIC rests upon the assumption that a child has a clear understanding of the state and trait instructions the child's attention should be directed to the fact that the instructions are different for the two parts of the inventory. It should be emphasized that the child must report how he feels at a particular moment in time when he responds to the S-Anxiety scale (C-1), and how he generally feels when he responds to the T-Anxiety scale (C-2). The standard procedure for administering the STAIC, especially in group administrations, is for the examiner to read the directions aloud while the child reads them silently. In group administrations, the group should not be too large since children in such situations tend to be less attentive and occasionally become unruly. It is interesting to note, however, that in groups ranging from 15-2-

5 to 35 children, the size of the group did not seem to affect S-Anxiety scores in any systematic direction (Edwards, 1972). In administering the STAIC, the examiner should emphasize that one of the three phrases that follow the item stem should be checked, not the stem itself. With younger children, children with marginal reading ability, and those who come from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, it is especially important to ensure that the instructions are understood. After presenting the instructions, the child should be given the opportunity to raise questions. If specific questions arise in the testing session, the examiner should respond in a non-committal manner. Responses such as "Just answer according to how you generally feel," or "Answer the way you feel right now," will usually suffice. If a child asks the pronunciation or meaning of a particular word, the examiner should read the word to him but should not define it. Most children respond to all the items without being prompted, but if this question arises, they should be told not to omit any items. In research applications, the experimenter may wish to instruct subjects to respond to all of the items. Research on the STAI with adolescents and adults has consistently demonstrated that scores on the T-Anxiety scale are relatively impervious to the conditions under which this scale is given (Johnson & Spielberger, 1968; Lamb, 1969; Spielberger, et al., 1970), but S-Anxiety scores are (by design) influenced by the immediate environment. Therefore, in the standardization of the STAIC, the S-Anxiety subscale was given first, followed by the T-Anxiety scale, and this order is recommended when both scales are given together. The standard administration of the STAIC requires the child to respond to each item by checking the word or phrase printed on the Test Form to the right of the item-statement. For large samples, the STAIC may be administered with a machine scorable answer sheet. If this is necessary, care must be taken to insure that the child understands that he must blacken the space on the answer sheet that corresponds to the alternative choice on the Test Form which best describes his feelings. Children should also be cautioned to make sure that the number on the answer sheet corresponds with the number of the question on the Test Form. The use of multiple-choice answer sheets is not recommended for younger children nor for children with limited ability who are likely to have difficulty understand what they are supposed to do. The standard instructions printed on the Test Form should be employed consistently in administering the STAIC T-Anxiety scale. For the S-Anxiety scale, however, the instructions may be modified to permit the evaluation of level of S-Anxiety intensity for any situation or time interval that is of special interest to the clinician or experimenter. In clinical work, a child may be asked to report the feelings he experienced in play therapy or in a counseling interview, or he may be asked to indicate how he felt in a situation that he has previously described. -3-

6 In behavior therapy, the child may be asked to indicate how he felt while he visualized a specific stimulus situation. In research, the experimenter may give the scale with standard instructions or alter the instructions to focus upon a particular time period. A child may be instructed to respond, for example, according to how he felt while performing on an experimental task that he has just completed. It may be useful on lengthy tasks to instruct the child to respond according to how he felt earlier in the task, or how he felt while working on the final portion of the task. Most children have no difficulty in responding to the STAIC S-Anxiety items according to how they felt in a specific situation, or at a particular moment in time, provided the feelings were recently experienced and the child is motivated to cooperate with the experimenter. It has been reported that repeated administrations of personality tests may lead to greater reliability in differentiating among subjects (Howard & Diesenhaus, 1965), or have no significant influence on test scores (Bendig & Bruder, 1962). The STAI S-Anxiety scale has been given as often as three or four times in a single experimental session of one hour's duration, with results that appeared to reflect the a priori stress that impinged upon the subjects (e.g., Lamb, 1969; Spielberger, O'Neil, & Hansen, 1972). Therefore, if measures of changes in S- Anxiety intensity over time are desired, it appears that the STAIC S-Anxiety scale may be used. SCORING THE STAIC Children respond to the STAIC by selecting one of the three alternative choices for each item which describes them best (see the STAI Test Form). In essence, each STAIC item is a 3-point rating scale for which values of 1, 2, or 3 are assigned for each of the three alternative choices. Thus, scores on both the STAIC S-Anxiety and T-Anxiety subscales can range from a minimum of 20 to a maximum score of 60. The stem for all 20 STAIC S-Anxiety items is "I feel." For each of the 20 different key adjective terms, the child responds by checking one of the three alternatives that describes him best. The key terms in half the items are indicative of the presence of anxiety (e.g., nervous, worried), while the key terms reflect the absence of anxiety in the other half (e.g., calm, pleasant). For items in which the key term indicates the presence of anxiety, very and not are assigned values of 3 and 1, respectively. The order of weighting is reversed for items in which the key terms indicate the absence of anxiety, i.e., very = 1; not = 3. A value of 2 is assigned to all responses where the child checks only the adjective. For example, very nervous = 3; nervous = 2; and not nervous = 1; and very calm = 1, calm = 2, and not calm = 3. Items indicative of the absence -4-

7 of anxiety, which are scored 1, 2, and 3 are: 1, 3, 6, 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 17 and 20. For the remaining items, very is scored 3, and not, 1. The STAIC T-Anxiety scale requires the child to respond to each item by indicating the frequency of occurrence of the behavior described by that item. For example, for Item 6 ("I worry too much"), the child responds by checking hardly ever, sometimes, or often. The scoring weights assigned to hardly ever, sometimes, and often are 1, 2, and 3, respectively, for all of the STAIC T-Anxiety items. Children generally give responses for all of the STAIC items without special instructions or prompting. If a subject does omit one or two items on either the STAIC S-Anxiety or T-Anxiety scales, his prorated full-scale score can be obtained by the following procedure: (1) determine the mean score for the items to which the subject responded; (2) multiply this value by 20; and (3) round the product to the next higher whole number. If three or more items are omitted, however, the validity of the scale must be questioned. This manual includes a scoring key for scoring the STAIC S-Anxiety and T- Anxiety subscales by hand. To score S-Anxiety (C-1), place the appropriate template on the Test Form and simply add the response values printed on the scoring key for each item. T-Anxiety (C-2) has the same scoring for each item and does not require a template. Scoring is more conveniently done with a simple hand counter, but one may also do the adding in his head. The scores for each scale may be recorded at any convenient place on the Test Form. -5-

8 DEVELOPMENT II. DEVELOPMENT AND NORMS The development of the STAIC was begun in the fall of On the basis of a careful examination of other inventories designed to measure anxiety in children and extensive experience with the STAI in the measurement of anxiety in adolescents and adults, an initial pool of 33 S-Anxiety and 40 T-Anxiety items was derived. The format in which these preliminary items were written was similar to the STAI, but simplified to facilitate their use with elementary school children. The major changes in the format were a reduction in the number of response categories from four to three and printing the three response categories on the Test Form for each item to make the required response more concrete. The preliminary STAIC S-Anxiety and T-Anxiety items were presented individually to a number of fourth and fifth grade elementary school children who were interviewed immediately after they responded to the scales. On the basis of the reactions of these children, the format for the S-Anxiety and T-Anxiety scales was further revised and simplified. The items in the revised format were then given to fourth, fifth, and sixth grade children in the Woodville, Florida, Elementary School, a school located in a semi-rural area with many pupils from lower socioeconomic class families. It was assumed that children from such backgrounds would have maximum difficulty with a self-report inventory. The children were tested in groups in their regular classrooms. In addition to the STAIC, they were given the Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale (CMAS) (Castaneda, McCandless, & Palermo, 1956) and the General Anxiety Scale for Children (GASC) (Sarason, Davidson, Lighthall, Waite, & Ruebush, 1960). The CMAS was administered first, followed by the GASC, and the preliminary forms of the STAIC S-Anxiety and T-Anxiety scales. Finally, the STAIC S-Anxiety items were given with instructions for the children to imagine they were about to take a test and to respond according to how they believed they would feel. The responses for all of these instruments were recorded on the same IBM 1230 multiple-choice answer sheet. Prior to the administration of the anxiety measure, the children were given special instructions and practice in the use of the answer sheet. The selection of the final set of items for the STAIC T-Anxiety scale was based on a combined criterion which was defined in terms of the internal consistency and concurrent validity of each item. To determine concurrent validity, correlations for each item with the CMAS and the GASC were computed for both boys and girls. Internal consistency was evaluated on the basis of itemremainder correlations with the total preliminary T-Anxiety scale. -6-

9 Of the 40 preliminary T-Anxiety items, 18 correlated better than.20 with both the CMAS and the GASC, and had item-remainder correlations of.20 or better with the preliminary STAIC T-Anxiety scale for both sexes. Two additional items that were highly correlated with the CMAS and GASC were added, resulting in a final set of 20 items for the STAIC T-Anxiety scale. One of the added items had very high internal consistency for boys, but not for girls; the second added item had high internal consistency for girls but not for boys. For the STAIC S-Anxiety scale, the criteria for the selection of items was based on internal consistency and construct validity. Item-remainder correlations were computed separately for boys and girls for each item on the 33-item preliminary scale. Point-biserial correlations were also computed for each item for both standard and special conditions. Item-remainder correlations of.20 or higher for both males and females were obtained for 26 items. Of these, the point-biserial correlations were.20 or higher for both males and females for 22 items. The two preliminary S-Anxiety items judged to be weakest were subsequently eliminated, resulting in the final 20-item STAIC S-Anxiety scale. The STAIC scales resulting from the procedures described above comprise what may be regarded as an experimental form of the STAIC. Several of the T- Anxiety items are weaker than we would like. One S-Anxiety item (jittery) appeared to be quite difficult for fourth graders, but was retained because it was empirically determined to be one of the best items for discriminating between the standard and special test conditions. Rather than making minor revisions that might invalidate the work already done, the normative data and the reliability and validation studies reported in this Manual were all based on the STAIC Test Form that was developed as described above. NORMS FOR THE STAIC The normative data for the STAIC are based on two large samples of elementary school children: (a) 456 male and 457 female fourth, fifth, and sixth grade students enrolled in three different schools in Tallahassee and Leon County, Florida; and (b) 281 males and 357 females enrolled in the fourth, fifth, and sixth grades drawn from three different schools in Bradenton and Manatee County, Florida. In collecting these data, the S-Anxiety scale was always given first, followed by the T-Anxiety scale. For both samples, 35 to 40 percent of the children were black, which is a substantially larger percentage than the proportion of black children in the two school systems. This resulted from the fact that, in each of the school systems, one school with a predominantly black student body was selected for study. The scores obtained for boys and girls in each of the three grades in the two samples were compared. Only small differences attributable to chance were found for the T-Anxiety scale. For the S-Anxiety scale, however, the scores of the Tallahassee sample were slightly higher than those of the Bradenton -7-

10 children. This difference may be attributable to the fact that the Tallahassee children were tested shortly before the examination period near the end of the school year. The norms are based on the combined data for the Tallahassee and Bradenton samples. The means and standard deviations for the normative sample are reported in Table 1 for the total sample and separately by sex and grade level. It may be noted that the mean STAIC T-Anxiety scores for girls were slightly higher than those for boys, and this was especially true for the children in the fourth and fifth grades. There were only minimal differences in the mean STAIC S-Anxiety scores obtained by the boys and girls. TABLE 1 STAIC Means and Standard Deviations For 1554 Elementary School Children 4 th Grade 5 th Grade 6 th Grade Total Sample Trait State Trait State Trait State Trait State Males Mean SD N Females Mean SD N Normalized T-scores (mean = 50; SD = 10) and percentile ranks for the normative sample are presented in Tables 2 and 3, separately by sex and grade. To find the T-score or percentile rank in the Norm Table that corresponds to an obtained S-Anxiety or T-Anxiety score, look up the child's raw score in the column at the left or right of the table and read the T-score or percentile rank for the child from the column that corresponds to the child's sex and grade. The STAIC S-Anxiety scores for the normative sample were positively skewed while those for the T-Anxiety scale were approximately normal. These characteristics of the STAIC sub-scale distributions are reflected in Table 2 in two ways: (1) the S-Anxiety normalized T-scores that correspond to raw scores of 20 are relatively larger than the corresponding T-score for the T-Anxiety scale for both males and females at each grade level; and (2) the S-Anxiety T-score for each raw score is substantially larger than the corresponding T-Anxiety T- -8-

11 score. It should be noted that S-Anxiety scores were relatively low during the class periods in which the children in the normative sample were tested; consequently, there is considerable "top" to the S-Anxiety scale which permits it to increase substantially in situations that are more stressful. -9-

12 Raw TABLE 2 Normalized T-Scores for the STAIC S-Anxiety and T-Anxiety Scales Fourth Grade Fifth Grade Sixth Grade Total Sample Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Scores ST TR ST TR ST TR ST TR ST TR ST TR ST TR ST TR Scores Raw -10-

13 Raw For use by Kristen Beckler only. Received from Mind Garden, Inc. on May 6, 2010 TABLE 3 Percentile Ranks for the STAIC S-Anxiety and T-Anxiety Scores Fourth Grade Fifth Grade Sixth Grade Total Sample Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Scores ST TR ST TR ST TR ST TR ST TR ST TR ST TR ST TR Scores Raw -11-

14 RELIABILITY III. RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY Test-retest reliability (stability) coefficients for the STAIC are presented in Table 4 for 246 elementary school children in the Bradenton normative sample who were retested after an eight-week time interval. The test-retest correlations for the T-Anxiety scale were only moderate, which probably reflects both a limitation in the psychometric properties of the scale and the instability of personality structure in children of this age. It may be noted, however, that the stability coefficients for the T-Anxiety scale were considerably higher than those for the S-Anxiety scale. Since a valid measure of S- Anxiety should reflect the influence of unique situational factors existing at the time of testing, low test-retest correlations for the STAIC S-Anxiety scale were anticipated. TABLE 4 Test-Retest Reliability Coefficients for Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Grade School Children Over a Six-Week Interval N T-Anxiety S-Anxiety Males Females Given the transitory nature of anxiety states, measures of internal consistency such as the alpha coefficient would seem to provide a more meaningful index of reliability than test-retest correlations. The alpha reliability of the STAIC S-Anxiety scale, computed for the Leon County sample by Kuder-Richardson formula 20 as modified by Cronbach (1950), was.82 for males and.87 for females. For the T-Anxiety scale, the alpha coefficients were.78 for males and.81 for females. Further evidence of the internal consistency of the STAIC scales is provided by itemremainder correlations computed for the Leon County sample, which are presented in Table 5. The median item-remainder correlation for the items in the S-Anxiety scale was.38 for the males and.48 for females. For the T-Anxiety scale, the median correlation was.35 for males and.40 for females. These correlations are somewhat lower than the item-remainder coefficients typically found for adolescents and adults with the STAI (Spielberger, et al., 1970). In summary, the internal consistency of the STAIC scales is reasonably good and the test-retest reliability (stability) of the T-Anxiety scale is moderate. The test-retest correlations for the STAIC S-Anxiety scale are quite low, as would be expected for a -12-

15 measure designed to be sensitive to the influence of situational factors. In general, the subscales of the STAIC are somewhat less stable and not as internally consistent as the corresponding STAI scales (Spielberger, et al., 1970). TABLE 5 Item Remainder Correlation Coefficients for Individual STAIC S-Anxiety and T-Anxiety Items S-ANXIETY T-ANXIETY Item Males Females Males Females VALIDITY The STAIC was developed to provide operational measures of state and trait anxiety as these constructs were defined in the introduction to this Manual. Evidence of the concurrent validity of the STAIC T-Anxiety scale is shown by its correlation with the two most widely used measures of trait anxiety in children - the Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale (Castaneda, et al., 1956) and the General Anxiety Scale for Children (Sarason, et al, 1960). In a sample of 75 children, the STAIC T-Anxiety scale correlated.75 with the CMAS and.63 with the GASC (Platzek, 1970). Evidence bearing on the construct validity of the S-Anxiety scale is available for a sample of more than 900 fourth, fifth, and sixth grade students. These students were first administered the S-Anxiety scale with the standard instructions (NORM condition) and then asked to respond to the STAIC S-Anxiety scale according to how they -13-

16 believed they would feel just before the final examination in an important subject (TEST condition). The mean scores in the NORM and TEST conditions for each individual S- Anxiety item are reported in Table 6. Critical ratios (CR) for the differences between these means, and point-biserial correlations, r(pb), for scores on each item with the two experimental conditions are also reported in Table 6. TABLE 6 Mean Scores on Individual STAIC S-Anxiety Items Under Norm and Test Conditions MALES (N=456) FEMALES (N=457) Item Norm Test CR r(pb) Norm Test CR r(pb) The mean scores for the S-Anxiety scale were considerably higher in the TEST condition (males, 41.76; females, 43.79) than in the NORM condition (males, 31.10; females, 31.03). Furthermore, each individual item significantly discriminated between the NORM and TEST conditions for both the males and females. The magnitude of the differences in S-Anxiety evoked in boys and girls by the two experimental conditions is reflected in the size of the CR and the point-biserial correlation for each item. It may be noted that item 4 (nervous) discriminated best between the NORM and TEST conditions for boys, and item 7 (scared) was the best discriminator for girls. -14-

17 CORRELATIONS WITH OTHER SCALES Table 7 presents correlations between the STAIC S-Anxiety and T-Anxiety scales with the California Test of Mental Maturity and the California Achievement Test for groups of 80 to 140 fourth, fifth, and sixth grade elementary school children in the Tallahassee sample. Most of the correlations are negative as might be expected with these measures of aptitude and achievement. TABLE 7 Correlations of the STAIC T-Anxiety Scale With Measures of Aptitude and Achievement Among Elementary School Children MALES FEMALES Grades: 4 th 5 th 6 th 4 th 5 th 6th California Test of Mental Maturity I.Q. Score California Achievement Test Reading Language Arithmetic Composite Score Study Skills It may be noted in Table 7 that the pattern of correlations for boys and girls appears to be somewhat different. For boys, the magnitude of the inverse relationship between T- Anxiety scores and the measures of ability and achievement increases slightly for each grade level. In contrast, the negative correlations were highest for the fourth grade girls and lowest for those in the fifth grade. In general, the correlations between the anxiety and ability-achievement scores tended to be higher for girls than for boys, except for the fifth grade children for whom there was little difference. The relationship between scores on the two STAIC scales and the grades assigned by teachers was determined for a sample of 75 fourth, fifth, and sixth grade elementary school children. The teachers were also asked to rate the behavioral manifestations of anxiety observed in each child. The correlations between the scales and grade point averages were.35 and.37, while teachers' ratings of manifest anxiety correlated.19 and -.07, respectively, with the T-Anxiety and S-Anxiety scales. While teachers' ratings were apparently unrelated to the children's self-ratings of anxiety, they proved to be the best predictors of academic achievement: a correlation of.42 was obtained between teachers' ratings of anxiety and grade-point averages. -15-

18 It is difficult to say how much the teacher's ratings reflected the child's social behavior in the classroom, or the child's ability to perform. For example, a teacher might conclude that, "Since Johnny does so well in school, he couldn't possibly be nervous." It is apparent, however, that scores on the STAIC measure something different than the behaviors regarded by teachers as manifestations of anxiety. Professor Richard L. Gorsuch (1971) and his associates at George Peabody College investigated the relationship between scores on the T-Anxiety scale and verbal IQ, race, socioeconomic status, grade and sex for a sample of 428 fourth and fifth grade elementary school children in Tennessee. The subjects were selected so that in the total sample there were approximately equal numbers of blacks and whites, males and females, and children from lower class and middle class socioeconomic backgrounds. STAIC T-Anxiety scores were not related to either race or grade level, but there was a significant negative correlation with verbal IQ as measured by the IPAT-CPQ. The T- Anxiety scores of girls were also significantly higher than those of the boys, and the T- Anxiety scores of children from lower socioeconomic backgrounds were higher than those of middle class children. CURRENT RESEARCH WITH THE STAIC There are a number of experimental investigations currently in progress in which the scale is being used. The findings of three recent studies are summarized below. Edwards (1972) investigated the effects of the stress associated with school integration on state and trait anxiety for black and white elementary school children. A courtordered integration plan resulted in the mid-year transfer of large numbers of fourth, fifth, and sixth grade children from previously all-black or all-white schools into newlyintegrated schools. The STAIC was administered to these children one week prior to transfer and then readministered approximately six weeks after transfer. The Lipsett (1958) Children's Self-Concept Scale (CSCS) was also administered in the posttransfer testing session. Edwards found that transferred females had higher posttransfer S-Anxiety scores than non-transferred females, whereas the S-Anxiety scores for transferred males did not differ from those of males who were not transferred. He also found that black children had higher T-Anxiety scores than white children, and that the T-Anxiety scores of girls were higher than those of boys. The overall correlation between STAIC T-Anxiety scores and the self concept measure was -.26, and this inverse relationship was strongest for the black males (r = -.41). Gaudry and Poole (1972) investigated the effects of success and failure on level of anxiety for ninth grade boys and girls in 31 classes in 18 different secondary schools in the Melbourne, Australia, metropolitan area. These students were divided into two "attainment" (achievement) groups based on marks in English and rankings by their English teachers. The children in the high and low achievement groups were then randomly assigned in approximately equal numbers to "success" and "failure" experimental conditions. Although all groups thought they were receiving exactly the -16-

19 same examination, the success group was given an easy 40-item vocabulary test, whereas the failure group received a difficult 40-item test. The success and failure groups were given the STAIC S-Anxiety scale immediately before the vocabulary test. The children scored their own examinations, and norms prominently posted on the blackboard provided immediate feedback about their performance. After the children were given time to calculate their scores on the vocabulary test, the STAIC S-Anxiety scale was given again. The mean S-Anxiety scores for the failure groups increased significantly from pre-test to post-test, while those of the success group declined. These effects were observed regardless of the sex or ability level of the children. Montuori employed the STAIC to study the effects of stress and anxiety on awareness and performance in verbal conditioning. The subjects were fifth and sixth grade boys divided into high and low T-Anxiety groups based on their scores on the STAIC T- Anxiety scale and the Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale. Stress and non-stress conditions were defined by instructions which informed one group of children they were going to receive a test and the second group that they were going to play a game. State anxiety was measured with the STAIC S-Anxiety scale immediately before the children participated in the verbal conditioning task, during the task, and after the task. No differences in the S-Anxiety scores of children in the stress and non-stress conditions were found, but the S-Anxiety scores of the HT-Anxiety subjects were consistently higher than those of the LT-Anxiety subjects. There was also a tendency for the S-Anxiety scores of the HT-Anxiety subjects in the stress condition to remain at a higher level throughout the verbal conditioning task, while those of the HT-Anxiety children in the non-stress condition decreased. A higher percentage of the children with low levels of S-Anxiety during the verbal conditioning task became aware of the correct response-reinforcement contingency than was the case for children exhibiting high levels of S-Anxiety. Only subjects who were aware of the response-reinforcement contingency exhibited performance gains, and aware subjects exhibiting higher levels of S-Anxiety during conditioning showed smaller gains than did the aware children who were low in S-Anxiety. Montuori interpreted his results as indicating that the perception of threat in an evaluative situation led to higher levels of state anxiety and associated self-relevant, non-task-oriented responses (uncertainty and caution) which interfered with performance. -17-

20 NOTES The STAIC has been used extensively in research in the assessment of anxiety in children in the United States and other countries (Spielberger, 1997). Over 200 references showing the wide-ranging use of the STAIC in research have been compiled into a Bibliography of Research with the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children (STAIC) which is provided in Appendix A. Investigators who use the STAIC in clinical or experimental research are requested to communicate their findings to Professor C.D. Spielberger, Director, Center for Research in Behavioral Medicine and Health Psychology, University of South Florida/Psychology Department, 4202 E. Fowler Avenue/BEH 339, Tampa, Florida, Observations and experiences of clinicians who use the STAIC in their professional practice will also be greatly appreciated. The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) is available for the measurement of state and trait anxiety in adolescents and adults. The STAI Test Form and Manual are available from Mind Garden. The STAI Manual provides detailed information on the development, reliability, and validity of the STAI that will be of general interest to those who use the STAIC in clinical work and research with children. The STAI Test Manual also provides extensive normative data for high school and college students, neuropsychiatric, general medical and surgical patients, and young prison inmates. The STAIC has been translated into 13 languages (listed in Appendix B). Please contact Mind Garden regarding the availability of a particular translation or adaptation. (A translation is the first step in the adaptation of a test into a second language.) The STAI and STAIC have been translated into Spanish and used in research in Puerto Rico, Mexico, and with Mexican-Americans in Texas. Copies of the Spanish Test Forms of the STAI and STAIC may be obtained from Mind Garden. The STAI has also been translated into Hindi and standardized with college students at Panjab University, Chandigarh, India. -18-

21 IV. REFERENCES Bendig, A.W., & Bruder, G. The effect of repeated testing on anxiety scale scores. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1962, 26, 392. Castaneda, A., McCandless, B.R., & Palermo, D.S. The Children's Form of the Manifest Anxiety Scale. Child Development, 1956, 27, Cronbach, L.J. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 1951, 16, Edwards, C.D. Stress in the school: A study of anxiety and self-esteem in black and white elementary school children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida State University, Gaudry, E., & Poole, C. The effects of an experience of success or failure on state anxiety level. Journal of Experimental Education, 1972, 41, Gorsuch, R.L. The relationship between trait anxiety, I.Q., race, sex, and socioeconomic background in fourth and fifth grade elementary school children. Unpublished study, George Peabody College, Nashville, Tennessee, Howard, K.I., & Diesenhaus, H. 16 PF item response patterns as a function of repeated testing. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1965, 25, Hull, C.L. Principles of Behavior. New York: Appleton-Century, Johnson, D.T., & Spielberger, C.D. Effects of relaxation training and the passage of time on measures of state- and trait-anxiety. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1968, 24, Lamb, D.H. The effects of public speaking on self-report, physiological and behavioral measures of anxiety. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida State University, Lipsett, L. A Self-concept scale for children and its relationship to the Children's Form of the Manifest Anxiety Scale. Child Development, 1958, 29, Montuori, J.J. The effects of stress and anxiety on verbal conditioning in children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida State University, Platzek, D. Anxiety in children. Unpublished study, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida,

22 Sarason, S.B., Davidson, K.S., Lighthall, F.F., Waite, R.R., & Ruebush, B.K. Anxiety in Elementary School Children. New York: Wiley, Spence, K.W. A theory of emotionally based drive (D) and its relation to performance in simple learning situations. American Psychologist, 1958, 13, Spielberger, C.D. Theory and research on anxiety. In C.D. Spielberger (Ed.), Anxiety and Behavior. New York: Academic Press, 1966, Spielberger, C.D. Trait-state anxiety and motor behavior. Journal of Motor Behavior, 1971, 3, Spielberger, C.D. Current trends in theory and research on anxiety. In C.D. Spielberger (Ed.), Anxiety: Current Trends in Theory and Research, Vol. 1. New York: Academic Press, 1972a, Spielberger, C.D. Anxiety as an emotional state. In C.D. Spielberger (Ed.), Anxiety: Current Trends in Theory and Research, Vol. 1. New York: Academic Press, 1972b, Spielberger, C.D., Gorsuch, R.L., & Lushene, R.E. Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (Self-Evaluation Questionnaire). Palo Alto, California: Consulting Psychologists Press, Spielberger, C.D., O'Neil, H.F., & Hansen, D.N. Anxiety, drive theory, and computerassisted learning. In B.A. Maher, Progress in Experimental Personality Research, Vol. 6. New York: Academic Press, 1972, Veldman, D.J. Fortran Programming for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston,

23 V. APPENDICES APPENDIX A Bibliography of Research with the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children (STAIC) C.D. Spielberger, Ph.D. Distinguished Research Professor of Psychology Director, Center for Research in Behavioral Medicine and Health Psychology University of South Florida Tampa, Florida May 1997 General References Spielberger, C.D. (1973). Preliminary test manual for the State-Trait Inventory For Children. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc. Spielberger, C.D. (1983). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (Revised). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Spielberger, C.D. (1984). State-Trait Anxiety Inventory: A comprehensive bibliography. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Research Publications Alexander, A.B. (1972). Systematic relaxation and flow rates in asthmatic children: Relationship to emotional precipitants and anxiety. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 16, Alexander, A.B. (1980). The treatment of psychosomatic disorders: Bronchial asthma in children. In B.B. Lahey & A.E. Kazdin (Eds.), Advances in clinical child psychology (Vol. 3). New York: Plenum Press. Andrasik, F., Kabela, E., Quinn, S., Attansio, V., Blanchard, E.B., & Rosenblum, E.L. (1988). Psychological functioning of children who have recurrent migraine. Pain, 34,

24 Anton, J.E.K. (1978). The relationship between trait anxiety and parent-child interactions in upper elementary school children (Doctoral dissertation, University of Northern Colorado, 1978). Dissertation Abstracts International, 39, 189A. Aragona, J.A. (1983). Physical child abuse: An interactional analysis (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Florida, 1983). Dissertation Abstracts International, 44, 1225B. Bakker, F.C. (1988). Personality differences between young dancers and nondancers. Personality and Individual Differences, 9, Bakker, F.C., & van Wieringen, P.C.W. (1985). Anxiety induced by ego- and physical threat: A preliminary validation of a Dutch adaptation of Spielberger's State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children (STAIC). In C.D. Spielberger, I.G. Sarason, & P.B. Defares (Eds.), Stress and anxiety (Vol. 9, pp ). New York: Hemisphere/McGraw-Hill. Barton, K. (1970). Block manipulation by children as a function of social reinforcement, anxiety, arousal, and ability pattern (Doctoral dissertation, George Peabody College for Teachers, 1969). Dissertation Abstracts International, 30, 5219B. Bauermeister, J.J., Forestieri, B.V., & Spielberger, C.D. (1976). Development and validation of the Spanish form of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children (IDAREN). In C.D. Spielberger & R. Diaz-Guerrero (Eds.), Cross-cultural anxiety (pp ). Washington, DC: Hemisphere/Wiley. Bauermeister, J.J., Fumero, O.C., Villamil-Forestieri, B., & Spielberger, C.D. (1986). Confiabilidad y validez del inventario de ansiedad rasgo y estado para niños y panameños [Reliability and validity of the IDAREN]. Revista Interamericana de Psicologia, 20, Bedell, J.R. (1977). The effects of instructions on the measurement of state anxiety in children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 45, Bedell, J.R., Giordani, B., Armour, J.L., Tavormina, J., & Boll, T. (1977). Life stress and the psychological and medical adjustment of chronically ill children. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 21, Bedell, J.R., & Roitzsch, J. (1976). The effects of stress on state and trait anxiety in emotionally disturbed, normal and delinquent children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 4, Beidel, D.C., & Turner, S.M. (1988). Comorbidity of test anxiety and other anxiety disorders in children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 16,