Ego-threat interpretive bias in test anxiety: On-line inferences

Abstract

The hypothesis that test anxiety is associated with an on-line bias towards threatening interpretations of ambiguous information was explored by means of a lexical decision task. Ambiguous sentences (concerned with ego-threat, physical-threat, or non-threat events) were presented to high- and low- test-anxiety subjects. Sentences were followed by a disambiguating word or a very wordlike corresponding nonword, which either confirmed or disconfirmed the threat implied by the sentence. A control condition involved the presentation of words and nonwords alone, without being primed by the sentences. Results indicated that there were no differences in lexical decision times as a function of test anxiety when words and nonwords were presented alone. In contrast, when they were primed, high-anxiety subjects took longer to respond correctly to the ego-threat confirming nonword, and to the ego-threat disconfirming word, compared with low-anxiety subjects; likewise, high-anxiety subjects responded faster to the ego-threat confirming word than to the ego-threat disconfirming word, compared with low-anxiety subjects. These results suggest that test anxious individuals are likely to draw inferences with an ego-threat meaning, but not with a physical-threat meaning, when reading ambiguous sentences.