Baloglu & Zeldhart's (2007) confirmatory factor analysis supported the 3 factors identified by Alexander & Martray, but 5 of the MTA items did not map to that factor and were removed to produce a 20-item RMARS).
This paper reports the results of the first part of this project, which aimed to investigate the range of anxiety that first year PST feel towards mathematics, using the RMARS survey.
A range of mathematics anxiety surveys was considered (see Table 1.) The RMARS (Alexander & Martray, 1989) was chosen because of its length, fit with the research question, appropriateness for group and strong psychometric information.
Ethics approval was obtained from the university ethics committee, and agreement to use the RMARS survey was received from the author.
Means and standard deviations for the total scale scores on the RMARS were computed (see Table 2).
Sample 1 and sample 2 were statistically equivalent on the total RMARS scores, (p < 0.25), as well as the three subscales (Mathematics Test Anxiety (MTA), p < 0.33; Numerical Task Anxiety (NTA), p < 0.09; and Mathematics Course Anxiety (MCA), p < .73).
Centered SMI and RMARS
scores and the interaction term were entered as predictors sequentially such that SMI and RMARS
were entered in the first block and the interaction term entered in the second, according to the methodology set forth by Aiken and West (1991).
The RMARS, on the other hand, is a mathematics anxiety instrument that assumes the multidimensionality of the construct.
Psychometric properties of the RMARS were investigated in a few studies.
In addition, Moore, Alexander, Redfield, and Martray (1988) found high to moderate correlations between the RMARS and the MAS (Fennema & Sherman, 1976), the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (Spielberger, Gorsuch, Lushene, Vagg, & Jacobs, 1983), and the Test Anxiety Inventory (Spielberger, 1980).
Because the psychometric properties of the RMARS have not been fully investigated, we set out to investigate the validity and reliability of the scale.
The modified RMARS model was cross-validated on Sample 2.