Abstract

While completing a science test and science survey, 155 high school students wore a biometric wristband (measuring electrodermal activity; EDA) and self-reported their science self-efficacy and science anxiety. Adopting a challenge-threat appraisal perspective and latent profile analysis, we explored how students were psychologically (self-efficacy, anxiety) and physiologically (EDA) oriented to science. We identified three groups (profiles), representing different challenge-threat profiles. The largest group was the ‘composed challenge-and-threat’ group (modest EDA, average anxiety, average self-efficacy). The next largest was the ‘aroused high-threat’ group (elevated EDA, elevated anxiety, low self-efficacy). The third represented ‘composed high-challenge’ students (modest EDA, elevated self-efficacy, low anxiety). The aroused high-threat group scored significantly lower than composed high-challenge and composed challenge-and-threat groups in science test performance and flow. Notably, the composed high-challenge and composed challenge-and-threat groups did not significantly differ in test performance; however, the composed high-challenge group was significantly higher in flow than the composed challenge-and-threat group.

摘要

在完成科学测试和科学调查时，155 名高中生戴着生物识别腕带（测量皮肤电活动；EDA）并自我报告他们的科学自我效能感和科学焦虑。我们采用挑战-威胁评估视角和潜在概况分析，探讨了学生在心理（自我效能感、焦虑）和生理（EDA）方面如何面向科学。我们确定了三个组（配置文件），代表不同的挑战-威胁配置文件。最大的组是“组合挑战和威胁”组（适度 EDA、平均焦虑、平均自我效能）。次大的是“被唤醒的高威胁”组（EDA 升高、焦虑升高、自我效能低）。第三个代表“组成的高挑战”学生（适度的 EDA、提高的自我效能感、低焦虑）。在科学测试表现和流程方面，唤醒高威胁组的得分明显低于组合高挑战组和组合挑战和威胁组。值得注意的是，组成的高挑战组和组成的挑战和威胁组在测试表现上没有显着差异；然而，组合式高挑战组的流量明显高于组合式挑战和威胁组。