Claims

Maths anxiety did not independently predict STEM career choice once maths achievement was controlled, though it predicted in the unadjusted joint model

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? Maths anxiety significantly predicted STEM career choice in the unadjusted joint model (OR = 0.78) but not when maths achievement was controlled. → Ferdinand 2024

Evidence

Ferdinand 2024

Ferdinand, R., Malanchini, M. & Rimfeld, K. (2024). Mathematics interest, self-efficacy, and anxiety predict STEM career choice in emerging adulthood. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-024-00275-1

q3 · i? · associational · r2

Second logistic regression model in the TEDS cohort adjusting maths anxiety, self-efficacy and interest for GCSE maths achievement. The article states maths anxiety "does not independently predict" STEM career choice once achievement is controlled; ORs only slightly attenuated (0.79–0.81).

"Results from the second model indicate that maths anxiety does not independently predict STE M career choice when the effects of maths achievement are controlled. However, effect sizes in the adjusted models were only slightly attenuated compared to the unadjusted model (ORs ranging between 0.79 and 0.81)"

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-26
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.