Effect of Systematic Desensitization on Anxiety and Achievement of Nigerian Secondary School Students in Mathematics

Abstract

This study investigates the impact of systematic desensitization (SD) on mathematics anxiety and achievement among Nigerian secondary school students. Employing a quasi-experimental design with a pretest and post-test nonequivalent control group design, we selected 120 students (58 boys, 62 girls) from a pool of 3390 senior class one students using a multi-stage sampling procedure. Assessment tools included the Mathematics Achievement Test and Mathematics Anxiety Scale. The six-week intervention demonstrated significant results with moderate effect sizes, revealing that SD significantly reduced mathematics anxiety (F[1,115] = 86.66, p < .001) and enhanced academic achievement (F[1,115] = 92.458, p < .001). Gender showed no substantial influence on mathematics anxiety (F[1,115] = .365, p = .547) or achievement under SD treatment (F[1,115] = .006, p = .937). This study underscores the effectiveness of SD in reducing mathematics anxiety and improving mathematics performance among Nigerian students.

Keywords:

• Mathematics
• mathematics achievement
• mathematics anxiety
• school students
• systematic desensitization

Introduction

Mathematics is essential for all basic and secondary education students. In both primary and secondary schools, passing mathematics is one of the requirements for advancement to the next level of study. The bottom line is that mathematics is crucial and a “must” for all Nigerian students. Mathematics contains everything necessary to help learners improve their numerical skills (Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2013). The student’s understanding of and proficiency with handling numbers can support their capacity for logical reasoning, quantitative analysis, and spatial reasoning. It is important to remember that a country serious about expanding its technological foundation should take its responsibility to teach mathematics seriously. Without a foundation in and understanding mathematics, no country can grow in science. The widespread consensus is that mathematical proficiency is critical in enhancing oneself and opening prospective job alternatives for young people (Uchechi & Onukwufor, 2018).

Despite the relevance of mathematics, many students in Nigeria still do not perform well in the subject. At the West Africa Senior Secondary Certificate Examination (WASSCE) in Nigeria from 2010 to 2015, Onyeka and Arokoyu (2018) identified a trend in students’ mathematics performance. They revealed that mathematics performance in Nigeria has been persistently poor over the years, as less than 50% of the candidates passed at the credit level. Reports from the West Africa Examination Council (WAEC) indicated students’ areas of weaknesses in mathematics as contained in the Chief Examiners’ Reports of 2014–2021 (http://www.waeconline.org.ng/e-learning/mathematics/mathsmain.html). Also, the National Bureau of Statistics (2017) published the National Examination Council (NECO) distribution of results by state, gender, and subjects from 2013 to 2016 which showed a downward trend in students’ achievement in mathematics (http://nigerianstat.gov.ng/).

Mathematics educators have identified various factors responsible for students’ poor achievement in mathematics. Some of these factors are attributed to the flawed foundation of students in mathematics, overcrowded mathematics classes and worn-out mathematics resources (Evans et al., 2019); anxiety toward mathematics (Nzeadibe et al., 2023; Sarfo et al., 2020, 2022; Sule, 2017); the harshness of the mathematics teacher while teaching mathematics (Jameel & Ali, 2016; Okeke, Egara, Orga, & Chinweike, 2023; Okeke, Egara, Orga, & Nzeadibe, 2023); laziness on the part of students and indiscipline toward mathematics (Inweregbuh et al., 2020; Kumah et al., 2016; Okeke, Aneshie-Otakpa, et al., 2022; Okeke, Obun, et al., 2022); negative attitude exhibited by students toward mathematics, lack of mathematics teaching and learning materials (Karigi et al., 2015; Mosimege & Egara, 2022; Osakwe, Egara, Inweregbuh, Nzeadibe, & Emefo, 2023; Osakwe, Egara, Inweregbuh, Nzeadibe, Okeke, et al., 2023); and poor attitude toward mathematics by teachers and students (Egara & Mosimege, 2023a, 2023b; Wachira, 2016). Out of the factors listed as responsible for students’ poor mathematics achievement, as postulated by Sule (2017), anxiety toward mathematics is interesting to this study.

Mathematics anxiety is one major problem to blame for students’ weak performance in connection to mathematics. Mathematics anxiety can negatively impact a learner’s initial mathematics learning (Soumen & Susanta, 2018; Terry et al, 2023). It is a psychological phenomenon often considered when examining students’ problems in mathematics (Alam & Halder, 2018). Many students worldwide struggle with mathematics anxiety, which psychologically affects a learner by causing panic, a sense of helplessness, worry, stomachaches, and tension, among other things, whenever the learner is involved in any mathematical calculation or activity. There is no way for learning to occur when learners are engaged in mathematics-related activities and are experiencing anxiety, worry, fear, etc.

Mathematics anxiety can manifest with some symptomatic characteristics by which one can identify that a student suffers from mathematics anxiety. These are physical, psychological, and behavioral symptomatic characteristics (Mollah, 2017). Physical symptoms are increased heartbeat, sweaty hands, lightheadedness, and upset stomach. Psychological symptoms are associated with the inability to concentrate in mathematics class, students feeling helpless, and feelings of disgrace and worry. Behavioral symptoms are combined with avoidance of mathematics classes, students’ disfavor the mathematics homework until the last moment and irregular study (Jackson, 2008; Plaisance, 2009; Woodard, 2004). Therefore, anxiety symptoms can occur through exposure to a problematic situation or sometimes merely through thinking about the object or situation. In other words, mathematics anxiety symptoms can occur when the student is engaged in mathematics teaching and learning or just thinking of mathematics. Counseling psychologists have suggested using psychotherapies or counseling therapies, such as Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy, Systematic Desensitization (SD), and solution-focused brief therapy, among others, to treat mathematics anxiety that is endemic among students. These therapies lessen maladaptive behavior like anxiety, phobia, depression, and stress (Eifediyi, 2015). Among the listed recommended treatments, SD is of interest to this study.

This study highlights the effectiveness of SD as an intervention in alleviating math anxiety within the context of mathematics education. Understanding the impact of math anxiety on academic performance holds critical importance for several reasons. Firstly, elevated levels of math anxiety can impede students’ ability to engage effectively with mathematical concepts, ultimately leading to diminished academic achievement. This can have lasting repercussions on their educational and career trajectories. Moreover, addressing math anxiety transcends individual success; it carries broader implications for educational policy and curriculum development. By identifying successful interventions like SD, we contribute to the formulation of strategies that hold the potential to enhance overall math education outcomes. Furthermore, the reduction of math anxiety fosters a more inclusive and equitable learning environment, benefiting all students.

Joseph Wolpe introduced SD in 1958 as a method for addressing anxieties and phobias. SD, also known as gradual exposure therapy, involves controlled exposure to anxiety-triggering stimuli alongside relaxation techniques (Raypole, 2019). Research by Kolo and Mallum (2015) and Ifeanyi et al. (2015) highlights SD’s effectiveness in mitigating anxiety, with significant implications for psychology and counseling (Obi & Oguzie, 2019; Raypole, 2019). In the school setting, SD is a psychotherapy based on classical conditioning, where a school guidance counselor gradually exposes students to fear-inducing situations while they practice relaxation techniques (Rice, 2018). Variations of SD include group SD, emotive imagery, and self-control desensitization, which were the focus of this study.

This study examines the efficacy of SD variations in addressing math anxiety among senior secondary school students. SD involves gradual exposure to feared circumstances, creating a psycho-physiological condition that inhibits anxiety responses (Hakimian & Lancy, 2016). It serves as an effective behavior modification technique for anxiety and fear-related issues (Karfe & Ntasin, 2018). Before engaging in SD, individuals learn relaxation techniques such as diaphragmatic breathing, visualization, and progressive muscle relaxation (Raypole, 2019). They also develop an anxiety hierarchy list and learn to pair relaxation skills with anxiety-inducing situations to extinguish fear responses. The foundational principles of classical conditioning underpin the SD technique’s effectiveness in reversing previously learned fear responses.

SD has proven to be effective in other fields of study. For example, in the study conducted by Oliha (2013), the effectiveness of SD was explored in reducing truancy among school adolescents in Edo State, Nigeria. The findings of Oliha’s research indicated that SD was effective in addressing truant behavior among adolescents. Importantly, Oliha observed no significant gender differences in the benefits derived from the SD treatment. In other words, both male and female students experienced similar positive outcomes when exposed to the SD technique. This suggests that gender did not play a significant role in influencing the effectiveness of SD on reducing truancy, as both genders derived comparable benefits from the intervention. Mohammad and Abdel-Rahman (2015) examined the effectiveness of SD in group counseling to reduce anxiety for Jordanian learners of English as a foreign language and found SD effective. Still, they reported that the use of SD was gender-specific, favoring female students. Ifeanyi et al. (2015) also found SD to reduce test anxiety in secondary school students. Additionally, their study found no significant differences between the efficiency of the SD technique in reducing test anxiety in male and female students.

Similarly, Ernest-Ehibudu and Wayii (2017) found SD effective in managing math phobia inherent in secondary school students in Rivers State. Karfe and Ntasin (2018) reported the effectiveness of using SD to reduce test anxiety among physics students in Taraba State. The academic success of male and female students who received the SD treatment was not significantly different, according to their study. In another study, Aihie and Igbineweka (2018) found SD to be effective in reducing the test anxiety status of undergraduate students. Lastly, Obi and Oguzie (2019) found SD effective in a study conducted to determine the effect of SD on generalized anxiety among secondary school adolescents. Akeb-urai et al. (2020) investigated the effect of SD on mathematics anxiety and performance among college students. They found that SD effectively reduced students’ mathematics anxiety levels and increased their mathematics performance among college students.

SD often commences with the client’s imagination, progressing through a series of fearful situations. Simultaneously, it employs relaxation techniques to counteract anxiety or anxiety-inducing scenarios. Clients can efficiently apply this technique in real-life situations once they learn to regulate their anxiety while picturing terrifying scenarios (Raypole, 2019). In a school setting, the counselor divides students into two groups of eight, relaxes them, and instructs them to visualize anxiety-inducing stimuli in a mild and tranquil state. After triggering a bit of panic by having them imagine the scene, the counselor then instructs the learners to cease picturing it and encourages them to continue relaxing. The complete order of SD is: relax, imagine, relax, stop, imagine, relax (Onwuasoanya, 2014). Following this, after the students have relaxed, the SD order is repeated with the same or slightly more upsetting stimulus. The subsequent stimulus is then introduced and dissolved. This process builds up conditioned inhibition with each evocation and subsequent dampening of the fear response. Ultimately, students can picture even the previously most frightening stimuli with tranquility, and this calmness generalizes to real-life circumstances (Onwuasoanya, 2014).

In applying the operations of SD, we aim to test the technique on a group of anxious mathematics students experiencing a decline in their mathematics achievement due to mathematics anxiety. We intend to observe if there will be a corresponding enhancement in their mathematics achievement, particularly among male and female students. Gender, referring to socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and characteristics society deems appropriate for men and women (World Health Organization, 2011), is a crucial factor to consider. Investigating the influence of gender on mathematics anxiety and mathematics achievement during SD treatment is essential in this study.

Theoretical Basis

The study’s foundation rested on the classical conditioning theory discovered by Ivan Pavlov in 1905. This theory posits that learning occurs through interactions with the environment, and what is learned can also be unlearned. The findings of our study validated Pavlov’s classical conditioning theory, demonstrating that the application of SD, which is rooted in this theory and employs counterconditioning, effectively enables students to overcome mathematics anxiety, gradually replacing it with a relaxation response.

However, upon reviewing existing studies, we discovered a scarcity of empirical research on the efficacy of employing SD to alleviate mathematics anxiety and improve mathematics performance, particularly in male and female secondary school students in Enugu, Nigeria. This identified gap underscores the significance and relevance of our study. Thus, the objectives of this research paper were to determine the effect of SD on the anxiety and achievement of secondary school students in mathematics and to find out the effect of SD on the anxiety and achievement of male and female students in mathematics.

Research Questions

The following research questions guided the study:

1. What are the mean mathematics anxiety scores of secondary school students exposed to SD treatment and those in the control group?

2. What are the mean mathematics achievement scores of students exposed to SD treatment and those exposed to the control group?

3. What are the mean mathematics anxiety reduction scores of male and female students exposed to SD treatment?

4. What are the mean mathematics achievement scores of male and female students exposed to SD treatment?

Hypotheses

The following research hypotheses are formulated to guide the study:

1. Students exposed to SD treatment will have significantly lower mean scores on mathematics anxiety compared to those in the control group.

2. Students exposed to SD treatment will demonstrate significantly higher mean mathematics achievement scores compared to those in the control group.

3. Male students exposed to SD treatment will exhibit a greater reduction in mean mathematics anxiety scores compared to female students.

4. Male students exposed to SD treatment will achieve significantly higher mean mathematics achievement scores compared to female students.

Method

Design and Population

The researchers used a quasi-experimental study design. The researchers decided to employ a quasi-experimental design since the researchers did not randomly assign subjects to the treatment and control groups. The researchers utilized intact classes in the sampled schools. The Nsukka Education Zone of Enugu State served as the study’s location. Three Local Government Areas (LGA) comprise the Nsukka Education Zone: Nsukka, Uzo-Uwani and Igbo Etiti LGA.

The study population included 3390 students studying mathematics in senior secondary one (SS1) drawn from 59 public schools in Nsukka Education Zone (Nsukka LGA: 30 schools, Uzo-Uwani LGA: 14 schools and Igbo-Etiti LGA: 15 schools) of Enugu State. There are 1644 boys’ and 1746 girls’ students (Post Primary Schools Management Board, 2019). The participants were 120 SS 1 students who met the inclusion criteria, comprising 58 boys and 62 girls. The students’ age in the experimental group (M = 15.05, Std = 0.87 years) was not significantly different to the age of students in the control group (M = 14.77, Std = 0.73 years; t(118) = 1.897, p = .503). Other details of the students’ demographic information are shown in Table 1. The multi-stage sampling procedure was employed for this study. Firstly, two LGAs (Nsukka and Igbo-Etiti) out of the three were purposively selected. This is because only the two LGAs selected have professional guidance counselors needed for the study. Nsukka LGA has 10 schools with professional guidance counselors, while Igbo-Etiti has three schools with professional guidance counselors. Secondly, four schools were purposely selected from the 10 public secondary schools with professional school counselors in the two LGAs. (two schools from Nsukka and two schools from Igbo-Etiti). The reason for purposively drawing two schools each from the two LGA is to strike a balance with the second LGA with fewer professional guidance counselors. A total of 565 SS 1 students were enrolled in the sampled schools, but out of the 565 students, after eligibility screening, 120 students met the inclusion criteria. The researchers’ eligibility criteria set was that any SS 1 student who scored $\ge$ 51 on the Mathematics Anxiety Scale (MAS) during the pretest stage automatically becomes a participant in the study. A score of $\ge$ 51 showed symptoms of mathematics anxiety among students. Therefore, the 120 students who met the inclusion criteria were found to show signs of mathematics anxiety, as observed from their scores in the MAS. Thirdly, the four public schools that were previously chosen were divided into the experimental (SD) and control groups using simple random sampling by balloting. After the process, of the two schools in Nsukka LGA, one represented the SD group, and the second represented the control group. Similarly, the two schools in Igbo-Etiti LGA represented the SD and control groups, respectively. Consequently, 58 students represented the SD group, and 62 students represented the control group.

Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of the Students.

Characteristic Dimension	Experimental Group, n (%)	Control Group, n (%)	$x$^2	Significance
Gender
Male	25 (43.1%)	33 (56.9%)	1.230	.267
Female	33 (53.2%)	29 (46.8%)
Age	15.05±.87	14.77±.73	*1.897(df = 118)	.503
School location
Urban	25 (43.9%)	32 (56.1%)
Rural	33 (52.4%)	30 (47.6%)	0.870	.351

Note. n represents number of participants; $x^2$: chi-square; *t-test value.

Instrumentation

The MAS and Mathematics Achievement Test (MAT) were the instruments for data collection. The program manual for the experimental group was also created.

The MAS used in this study was adapted from the MAS developed by Zakariya in 2018. The 20-item MAS scale is rated on a five-point Likert scale response option of Strongly Agree, Agree, Neither agree nor disagree, Disagree and Strongly disagree. A score from 0 to 80 was derived for the scale, with 24 as an adequate screening cutoff for the inventory. The MAS has two anxiety subcategories: perception of difficulty and motivation (Cronbach’s alpha = .74) and anxiety related to learning mathematics (Cronbach’s alpha = .86). With appropriate proof of content and face validity, the instrument’s reliability coefficient was found to be .90 (Zakariya, 2018). The adapted MAS offers four response options on a four-point scale: Strongly Agree (SA), Agree (A), Disagree (D), and Strongly Disagree (SD). It has 20 items with weights of 1, 2, 3, and 4 points, respectively. A score of 50 was this study’s screening cutoff, meaning students with a score $\ge$51 were mathematics anxious. The participants were asked to rate each statement on a four-point scale, indicating how much they agreed or disagreed with the items. Experts validated the MAS, and the researchers conducted a trial testing on 30 SS 1 students outside the area of study. Cronbach’s alpha method was used to measure the internal consistency of the adapted MAS, and the reliability coefficient obtained was 0.79.

The researchers developed the MAT used in this study following the test blueprint. The MAT consists of 20 multiple-choice questions with four possibilities (A-D) from which a learner is required to select the right option for each item. Seven of the twenty questions were of higher order, while the other thirteen were of a lower level. The items in the MAT covered the entire units taught by their mathematics teacher for the first and second terms as contained in the Senior Secondary Schools Syllabus approved by WAEC and the State Ministry of Education, Enugu State. The topics covered include Number-based systems, Indices, Sets, Equations, Geometry, and trigonometry. Experts validated the MAT. The validated MAT was also trial-tested on 30 SS 1 students outside the area of study. Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 28 to determine the MAT’s internal consistency. The MAT’s reliability coefficient was 0.88 using the Kuder Richardson Formula 20 (K-R 20) method.

The SD program manual, adapted from Oparanozie (2016), facilitated the treatment program. The face and content validation of the MAS, MAT, and SD program manual was conducted by five Ph.D. experts specializing in their respective fields. These experts included one in Measurement and Evaluation, two in Mathematics Education, one in Psychology, and one in the Guidance and Counseling Department at the University of Nigeria, Nsukka. The instruments underwent a thorough validation process, with the experts evaluating the items for factors such as wording, alignment with research objectives, overall quality, and language proficiency. Their assessments resulted in necessary adjustments and ultimately culminated in the final production of the instruments.

Procedure

Pretreatment, treatment, and post-treatment stages are the subdivided stages of the experimental procedure.

Pretreatment

The researchers obtained permission to conduct the study from the principals of the sampled secondary schools. The school heads introduced the researchers as visiting school guidance counselors to assist with their educational problems. The researchers briefed four research assistants, including the mathematics teacher for each group, who facilitated the study’s participant groups. School guidance counselors who have received special training in dealing with psychological and behavioral issues in teenagers served as research assistants. Each of the four counselors employed for the study possessed a master’s degree in Guidance and Counseling and was representative of the selected schools. They were chosen because they have supplied students with crucial knowledge about academic adjustments that will improve their intellectual growth in the school system.

Each facilitator received instructions on how to manage the experimental (SD) and Control groups. They received copies of the comprehensive descriptions of the treatment packages the researchers had created and instructions on using and assessing them. For two weeks, there were twice-weekly sessions with the facilitators. Again, the researchers and each facilitator initially met the participants at their respective schools and developed a rapport with them to make sure they were at ease throughout the session. This allowed the students to understand the facilitators and one another better. Before the instruments were administered, each student was given a code number. This code was used for both the pretest and the post-test to avoid influencing the outcomes of either test separately. Then, as a pretest, the MAS was given to the students to determine which students displayed signs of mathematics anxiety. As earlier reported, students identified as having mathematics anxiety became study participants. The 120 mathematics-anxious students in both groups were pretested on MAT. Finally, the participants were given a breakdown of the program’s structure. The researchers also established expectations, which encompassed regular attendance, punctuality, and cooperation.

Treatment Stage

The experimental group received treatment using the SD intervention program, whereas the control group received a placebo. One treatment session per week was held for a total of six weeks. The guidance counselors conducted the treatment programs during the long break periods at their respective schools. This was achieved in six contact sessions of the treatment. The intervention manuals were administered to both groups by the guidance counselors. The implementation followed a series of 45-min meetings and lectures between the counselors and participants. Meanwhile, the counselors employed were not aware of another group’s existence. Below is the summary of the treatment programs for the two groups:

Experimental Group Sessions

• Week 1: Orientation concerning the SD treatment program was conducted, and the therapy description was made known to the participants.

• Week 2: Participants were taught how to use relaxation techniques.

• Week 3: Participants were taught about creating the mathematics anxiety hierarchy list.

• Week 4: Participants were taught to pair relaxation with mathematics anxiety hierarchy.

• Week 5: Repetition of how to pair relaxation with mathematics anxiety hierarchy.

• Week 6: Recap of the entire program.

Control Group Session

• Week 1: Orientation concerning hygiene practices was conducted to reawaken the essence of maintaining proper hygiene practices amongst students and was made known to the participants.

• Week 2: Focus was on the following areas: environment, germs, parasites, and diseases, stopping the spread of germs and parasites.

• Week 3: Participants were taught food poisoning and contamination and protecting food from contamination.

• Week 4: Participants were taught rubbish, rubbish and disease, disposal of rubbish and rubbish bins.

• Week 5: Participants were taught water source and its importance, water contamination and disease and how to treat contaminated water.

• Week 6: Participants were taught domestic and personal hygiene, poor hygiene and disease, and house hygiene cleaning.

Post-treatment Stage

One week after the final session with each group, the post-treatment phase was conducted. The MAS and MAT items were rearranged to avoid memory effect and were given to the participants as a post-test to respond. Responses from participants were scored, and findings were compared to their pretest scores. After statistical analysis, the effect of the treatment on the participants was inferred from the findings.

Variable Coding Information

In this study, gender was treated as a dichotomous variable, categorized into boys’ and girls’ groups. This coding approach was consistently applied across all stages of the research, enabling straightforward analysis and interpretation of gender-related findings.

Data Analysis

The analysis began with the use of SPSS software version 28 to thoroughly examine the collected data, employing measures like mean (M) and standard deviation (Std) for reporting the research questions. To test the study hypotheses, Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) was chosen, maintaining a significance level of p ≤ .05. ANCOVA served a dual purpose in the analysis. Firstly, it ensured the equality of baseline pretest data, providing a solid foundation for subsequent treatment implementation. Simultaneously, it established covariates between pretest and post-test measurements, enhancing the precision and accuracy of the analysis. In this research, the average effect size is d = 0.4, aligning with established conventions where 0.2, 0.4, and 0.6, respectively, denote small, medium, and large effects (Cumming & Calin-Jageman, 2017).

Ethical Implementation of SD

In conducting this study, careful attention was given to the ethical implementation of SD as an intervention method for addressing mathematics anxiety among secondary school students. Central to this ethical approach was obtaining informed consent and ensuring voluntary participation. Participants and their parents were provided with detailed information about the intervention, emphasizing that their involvement was entirely voluntary. This ensured that they entered the study with a clear understanding and willingness to engage in the SD sessions. Creating a supportive environment was paramount. Research assistants and facilitators underwent rigorous training to establish a safe and trusting atmosphere. Building rapport with participants was prioritized to foster open communication and a sense of security during the intervention.

The potential for distress in addressing anxieties was acknowledged. To mitigate this, a gradual and systematic exposure approach was employed. Participants progressed from less anxiety-provoking situations to more challenging scenarios in a carefully managed manner. They were equipped with coping strategies and relaxation techniques to navigate any heightened emotional responses that may arise. Regular monitoring and support were integral to the process. Research assistants and facilitators remained vigilant for signs of distress or discomfort. Participants were encouraged to voice concerns or discomfort, with protocols in place to provide immediate support and, if necessary, discontinue the session.

Respect for participants’ autonomy and dignity was consistently upheld. Participants had agency in setting their own pace and level of exposure, ensuring they were in control of their therapeutic journey. Their preferences, concerns, and limitations were valued and respected throughout the intervention. In conclusion, the ethical implementation of SD in this study was guided by a commitment to prioritizing the well-being and rights of the participants. By adhering to these ethical considerations, the study aimed to provide a supportive and empowering environment for participants to effectively address their mathematics anxiety.

Results

The results are presented following the research questions and hypotheses.

Research Question 1

What are the mean mathematics anxiety scores of secondary school students exposed to SD treatment and those in the control group?

Table 2 reveals the mathematics anxiety scores of students exposed to both groups. The students exposed to SD have a pretest mean score of 56.76 with a Std of 12.57 and a post-test mean score of 37.10 with a Std of 15.00 and a mean difference of 19.66. Students exposed to the control group had a pretest mean score of 56.89 with a Std of 17.88 and a post-test mean score of 57.97 with a Std of 14.14 and a mean difference of 1.08. Therefore, this means that the SD treatment had a positive effect on reducing mathematics anxiety among students. In contrast, the control group treatment did not positively impact lowering mathematics anxiety among students.

Table 2. The Mean Mathematics Anxiety and Achievement Scores of Students Exposed to SD and Control Groups.

Dependent Variable	Group	N	PreMAT		PostMAT		Mean Difference
			Mean	Std	Mean	Std
Mathematics anxiety	SD	58	56.76	12.57	37.10	15.00	19.66
	Control	62	56.89	17.88	57.97	14.14	1.08
Mathematics achievement	SD	58	30.95	11.86	41.81	10.46	10.86
	Control	62	36.45	14.24	35.65	13.89	0.8

Hypothesis 1

Students exposed to SD treatment will have significantly lower mean scores on mathematics anxiety compared to those in the control group.

Table 3 indicates a significant effect of treatment on mean scores of mathematics anxiety among secondary school students; F(1, 115) = 86.66, p < .05. Consequently, the null hypothesis of no significant difference was rejected at the 0.05 level. The researchers infer that SS 1 students exposed to the SD group experienced a reduction in mathematics anxiety compared to students in the control group. The effect size, as denoted by partial eta squared, was calculated as .430, indicating a medium effect. This implies that the SD technique accounted for 43.0% of the observed variance in the reduction of students’ mathematics anxiety.

Table 3. Summary of ANCOVA of the Effect of SD on Mathematics Anxiety by Treatment and Gender.

Source	Type III Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.	Partial Eta Squared
Corrected model	20,917.885^a	4	5229.471	35.065	.000	0.549
Intercept	2605.051	1	2605.051	17.468	.000	0.132
Pretest	7810.731	1	7810.731	52.374	.000	0.313
Gender	54.368	1	54.368	0.365	.547	0.003
Group	12,923.711	1	12,923.711	86.658	.000	0.430
Gender * group	39.259	1	39.259	0.263	.609	0.002
Error	17,150.481	115	149.135
Total	313,206.000	120
Corrected total	38,068.367	119

^a R squared = .549 (adjusted R Squared = .534).

Research Question 2

What are the mean mathematics achievement scores of students exposed to SD treatment and those exposed to the control group?

Table 2 also reveals the mathematics achievement scores of students exposed to both groups and was used to report research question two. The students exposed to SD treatment obtained a mean mathematics achievement score of 30.95, a standard deviation of 11.86 in the pretest, a mean score of 41.81 and a standard deviation of 10.46 in the post-test and a mean difference of 10.86. In comparison, the control group had a mean score of 36.45 and Std of 14.24 in the pretest, while in the post-test, they had a mean achievement score of 35.65 and Std of 13.89 and a mean difference of 0.8. The better performance of students exposed to SD treatment over the control group indicates that their maladaptive behavior toward mathematics changed positively.

Hypothesis 2

Students exposed to SD treatment will demonstrate significantly higher mean mathematics achievement scores compared to those in the control group.

The analysis in Table 4 revealed a significant difference in the mean mathematics achievement scores between students exposed to SD treatment and those in the control group, favoring the SD treatment group; F(1, 115) = 92.458, p < .05. Consequently, the null hypothesis asserting no difference was rejected, as the pvalue falls below the 0.05 significance level. The researchers assert that a notable difference exists in the mean mathematical achievement scores of learners exposed to SD therapy compared to those in the control group. The effect size, indicated by partial eta squared, was calculated as .446, suggesting a medium effect. This indicates that the SD technique accounted for 44.6% of the observed variance in the improvement of students’ mathematics achievement.

Table 4. Summary of ANCOVA of the Effect of SD on Mathematics Achievement by Treatment and Gender.

Source	Type III Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.	Partial Eta Squared
Corrected model	15,092.501^a	4	3773.125	106.990	.000	0.788
Intercept	1806.689	1	1806.689	51.230	.000	0.308
Pretest	13,837.898	1	13,837.898	392.383	.000	0.773
Gender	0.218	1	0.218	0.006	.937	0.000
Group	3260.664	1	3260.664	92.458	.000	0.446
Group * gender	1.503	1	1.503	0.043	.837	0.000
Error	4055.624	115	35.266
Total	198,175.000	120
Corrected total	19,148.125	119

^a R squared = .788 (adjusted R squared = .781).

Research Question 3

What are the mean mathematics anxiety reduction scores of male and female students exposed to SD treatment?

Table 5 reveals the mathematics anxiety scores of male and female students. The male students had a mean score of 56.40, a Std score of 13.40 in the pretest, a mean score of 37.33, a Std of 16.15 in the post-test, and a mean difference of 19.07. While their female counterparts had a mean score of 57.03 and a Std score of 12.11 in the pretest, a mean score of 36.66 and a Std score of 13.66 in the post-test, with a mean difference of 20.23. The result above shows that the male students had their mathematics anxiety reduced compared to their female counterparts. This is evident in their respective mean differences.

Table 5. The Mean Mathematics Anxiety and Achievement Scores of Male and Female Students Exposed to SD Treatment.

Dependent Variable	Gender	N	PreMAS		PostMAS		Mean Difference
			Mean	Std	Mean	Std
Mathematics anxiety	Male	25	56.40	13.40	37.33	16.15	19.07
	Female	33	57.03	12.11	36.80	13.66	20.23
Mathematics achievement	Male	25	32.60	12.17	43.00	11.46	10.4
	Female	33	29.70	11.66	40.91	9.72	11.21

Hypothesis 3

Male students exposed to SD treatment will exhibit a greater reduction in mean mathematics anxiety scores compared to female students.

Analysis of the result in Table 3 was used to test null hypothesis three. The table reveals no significant difference between the mean mathematics anxiety reduction scores of male and female students exposed to SD treatment: F(1,115) = .365, p $=$.547. Hence, since the exact probability value of .547 is higher than the level of significance specified at .05 (p > .05), the null hypothesis of no significant difference between female and male students’ mean mathematics anxiety reduction scores was not rejected. Therefore, the researchers conclude that the difference in the mean mathematics anxiety reduction scores of female and male students exposed to SD treatment was not statistically significant.

Research Question 4

What are the mean mathematics achievement scores of male and female students exposed to SD treatment?

Table 5 reveals the mathematics achievement scores of male and female students and was used to report research question four. The male students had a mean score of 32.60, a standard deviation score of 12.17 in the pretest, a mean score of 43.00 and a standard deviation of 11.46 in the post-test with a mean difference of 10.4. In contrast, their female counterparts had a mean score of 29.70, a standard deviation score of 11.66 on the pretest, a mean score of 40.91, a standard deviation score of 9.72 on the post-test, and a mean difference of 11.21. The result above shows that the mean mathematics achievement scores of the male students exposed to SD treatment in the pretest and post-test were higher than their female counterparts.

Hypothesis 4

Male students exposed to SD treatment will achieve significantly higher mean mathematics achievement scores compared to female students.

The study’s findings in Table 4 were also put to the test of hypothesis four. The outcome in the table indicates that gender was not significant; F (1, 115) =.006, p =.937. As a result, since the exact probability value of .937 is higher than the level of significance specified at .05 (p > .05), the null hypothesis that there is no significant difference for gender was not rejected. The researchers conclude that no discernible difference exists between the mean mathematical achievement scores of male and female students exposed to SD treatment.

Discussion

The study underscores the significant impact of SD in reducing mathematics anxiety among students. Notably, students exhibited a keen interest in the SD treatment sessions, particularly due to its emphasis on behavior modification. This aligns with the findings of Mohammad and Abdel-Rahman (2015), who demonstrated the efficacy of SD in group counseling to reduce anxiety among Jordanian students learning English as a foreign language. Additionally, our results are consistent with the studies of Ernest-Ehibudu and Wayii (2017) and Karfe and Ntasin (2018), highlighting the effectiveness of SD in managing math phobia and lowering test anxiety, respectively. The current finding further supports the conclusions drawn by Akeb-urai et al. (2020), emphasizing the effectiveness of SD in reducing anxiety, particularly in mathematics.

Beyond anxiety reduction, our study revealed a significant difference in the mean mathematics achievement scores between students exposed to SD treatment and those in the control group, favoring the SD therapy recipients. This suggests that SD not only dissipated negative perceptions and fears associated with mathematics but also facilitated a restructuring of students’ attitudes toward the subject. The guidance provided by professional counselors played a crucial role in alleviating mathematics anxiety, instilling confidence, and encouraging increased engagement with mathematical concepts. This echoes the findings of Akeb-urai et al. (2020), emphasizing the positive impact of SD on students’ performance in mathematics.

Surprisingly, our study found no statistically significant gender differences in the mean mathematics anxiety reduction scores among students who received SD treatment. This indicates that SD treatment is not gender-specific and is equally effective for both male and female students. This outcome aligns with previous research by Oliha (2013) and Ifeanyi et al. (2015), which reported no gender differences in the effects of SD on truant behavior and test anxiety, respectively. Consistent with the findings of Karfe and Ntasin (2018), our study did not observe a significant difference in the academic achievement between male and female students exposed to SD treatment. However, it is worth noting that our results contradict the gender-specific findings reported by Mohammad and Abdel-Rahman (2015), who observed a statistically significant difference in favor of female students. Possible explanations for this contradiction may include variations in the level of interest among male students in the SD treatment sessions and potential influences related to the therapist’s personality.

Furthermore, our study demonstrated no significant difference in the mean mathematics achievement scores between male and female students exposed to SD treatment, suggesting that both genders responded equally to the intervention. The positive interest, adherence to instructions, commitment to assignments, and consistent study and practice of mathematics concepts were shared characteristics among male and female students, contributing to the lack of significant gender disparity. In summary, our findings emphasize the overarching effectiveness of SD in reducing mathematics anxiety and improving academic achievement. The non-gender-specific nature of SD treatment highlights its inclusivity and potential benefits for all students, irrespective of gender. The study contributes to the existing literature by providing valuable insights into the nuanced impact of SD, underscoring its relevance as a holistic intervention for mathematics anxiety.

Educational Implication

The findings of this research carry significant implications for educational practitioners, policymakers, and, notably, school counselors. By illustrating the effectiveness of SD in alleviating mathematics anxiety and enhancing academic achievement among secondary school students, this study underscores the potential for targeted interventions in educational settings.

For mathematics educators, the study emphasizes the importance of recognizing and addressing students’ emotional well-being alongside academic instruction. Implementing SD techniques offers a valuable tool for educators to support students struggling with mathematics anxiety. By incorporating relaxation techniques and fostering positive perceptions of mathematics, educators can create a more inclusive and conducive learning environment.

Professional school counselors are integral in addressing students’ emotional well-being and academic success, particularly when it comes to managing mathematics anxiety. As key members of the school support system, they are uniquely positioned to assess, support, and provide tailored interventions for students experiencing mathematics anxiety. The findings of this study underscore the importance of integrating SD techniques within counseling practices to address mathematics anxiety effectively. By incorporating evidence-based approaches like SD, counselors can offer targeted interventions that promote emotional regulation and facilitate academic achievement. Specifically, counselors can utilize SD techniques to guide students in managing their anxiety responses to mathematics-related stimuli. Through gradual exposure to fear-inducing situations paired with relaxation techniques, students can learn to reduce their anxiety levels and develop coping strategies for dealing with mathematical tasks.

Moreover, the study highlights the significance of considering gender dynamics in counseling interventions for mathematics anxiety. Research suggests that male and female students may respond differently to SD techniques, and counselors should be mindful of these potential variations in their approach. By tailoring interventions to align with students’ individual needs and preferences, counselors can enhance the effectiveness of SD in addressing mathematics anxiety across diverse student populations. Ultimately, the integration of SD techniques within counseling practices offers promising avenues for supporting students’ emotional well-being and fostering a positive learning environment. Professional school counselors are encouraged to leverage the insights from this study to inform their practice and contribute to the holistic development of students in managing mathematics anxiety.

Government agencies and educational policymakers are encouraged to consider the implications of this research for shaping educational initiatives. By investing in professional development opportunities and training programs focused on the application of SD, these entities can contribute to a more comprehensive and supportive educational framework. This, in turn, has the potential to positively impact overall academic outcomes and student well-being.

In conclusion, the study’s implications extend beyond the confines of the research itself, offering actionable insights for stakeholders in the education sector. By embracing the principles of targeted intervention, prioritizing students’ emotional health, and incorporating gender-sensitive counseling practices, educators, counselors, and policymakers can collectively work toward creating a more nurturing and effective learning environment for all students.

Limitation

This study is not without limitations. Firstly, the findings of this study may be limited in their generalizability to other populations or settings beyond the specific context of Nsukka Education Zone in Enugu State. The sample was drawn exclusively from senior secondary one (SS1) students in public schools in this region, which may not be representative of students in other regions or educational systems. Therefore, prospective studies should incorporate other secondary levels. Secondly, a larger sample size would have provided more statistical power and increased the likelihood of detecting meaningful effects. With a small sample size, it’s possible that the study may not have had enough participants to adequately represent the population or to detect subtle effects. Thirdly, the data collected relied on self-report measures, specifically the MAS and MAT. Self-report measures are subject to response bias and may not always accurately reflect the true experiences or abilities of the participants. Fourthly, while efforts were made to ensure treatment fidelity through training of facilitators and detailed program manuals, there may still be variations in the delivery of the SD intervention across different sessions or facilitators, which could impact the consistency of treatment. Fifthly, the post-treatment assessment was conducted one week after the final session, providing a relatively short-term perspective on the potential effects of SD. Longer-term follow-up assessments could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the sustained impact of the intervention. These limitations should be considered when interpreting the results of the study and may inform future research in this area.

Conclusion

This study investigated the effect of SD on the anxiety and achievement of secondary school students in mathematics. This study reviewed empirical studies that have been carried out in determining the effectiveness of SD on other forms of anxiety exhibited by school students and were proven to have a positive effect in reducing anxiety. As a result of this study’s findings, the researchers have concluded that the SD technique effectively reduced mathematics anxiety and improved students’ mathematics achievement. We also concluded that the SD technique effectively reduced anxiety and improved male and female students’ achievement in mathematics.

Recommendation

1. Professional school counselors should train mathematics teachers on using and applying SD to help students remove the fear response of mathematics anxiety, which could lead to improved mathematics achievement. This can be achieved through organizing seminars, workshops, and conferences by the government in collaboration with the relevant educational bodies responsible for secondary school matters.

2. Frequent sensitization should be carried out on the importance of mathematics and why it should not be neglected since it is required for promotion to the next level of education. The school guidance counselors and mathematics teachers should carry this out.

3. Relevant education authorities should incorporate the SD technique in the mathematics curriculum. This will enable mathematics teachers to help desensitize the mathematics-anxious students before any mathematics instruction to reduce their mathematics anxiety levels and make the learning environment suitable.

Ethical Approval

The Research Committee on Ethics, Faculty of Education, University of Nigeria, Nsukka (REC/UNN/FE/2019/00043) approved conducting this research. The school principals officially authorized the research within their schools. Moreover, parents of eligible students gave their informed consent. After a detailed explanation of the study’s purpose, participants also provided verbal consent with full understanding. The researchers adhered to the ethical guidelines for conducting psychological research on humans as stipulated by the World Medical Association (2013) and the American Psychiatric Association (2017).

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Felix Oromena Egara

Dr. Felix Oromena Egara is an expert in the field of Mathematics Education. He is currently a Postdoctoral Fellow in the School of Mathematics, Natural Sciences and Technology Education in the Faculty of Education at the University of the Free State. His research interests include Ethnomathematics, Information and Communication Technology, Students’ Mathematics Achievement, Mathematics Teaching Methods, Teacher Education, Mathematics Anxiety and Psychotherapies.

Mogege Mosimege

Prof. Mogege Mosimege currently works as a Professor of Mathematics Education in the School of Mathematics, Natural Sciences and Technology Education in the Faculty of Education at the University of the Free State. He is also the Head of the School. His research interests include Socio-Cultural contexts in mathematics education (Ethnomathematics), Mathematical Modelling, Indigenous Knowledge Systems, Mathematics Teacher Education, and Information and Communication Technology.