The Fault in Our STARS: International Evidence that the Statistics Anxiety Rating Scale and the Revised Mathematics Anxiety Rating Scale Overlap
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
Statistics anxiety is widely recognised as a barrier to student learning, and the Statistics Anxiety Rating Scale (STARS) is its most widely used self-report measure. However, it remains unclear whether the STARS captures a construct distinct from mathematics anxiety or reflects a jangle fallacy. Using a large international sample of undergraduate students (N = 6,885) from 83 universities across 33 countries, we examined the empirical distinctiveness of the STARS relative to the Revised Mathematics Anxiety Rating Scale (R-MARS). Across four criteria, the evidence indicated substantial overlap. First, correlations between the STARS and R-MARS were consistently strong. Second, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses showed that items clustered primarily by type of educational experience (e.g., tests, help-seeking, interpretation) rather than by domain, with limited and unstable domain-specific factors. Third, both scales demonstrated statistically equivalent associations with 11 theoretically related anxiety and education variables. Fourth, the R-MARS explained negligible incremental variance beyond the STARS across these outcomes. Together, the findings suggest that the STARS and R-MARS largely measure the same underlying construct. Their continued separate use risks redundancy, conceptual fragmentation, and statistical artefacts, underscoring the need for clearer construct definition and more precise measurement tools.
