Welcome to the jangle (fallacy): The case of statistics and mathematics anxieties

Background
Statistics-related anxiety is a common barrier to learning in higher education, particularly for psychology and other non-specialist students. High prevalence rates are concerning because statistical literacy is integral to academic success, employability and informed citizenship. Clarifying the nature of statistics anxiety is central to understanding it, yet it remains unclear whether statistics anxiety is genuinely distinct from mathematics anxiety or simply another manifestation of the same construct.

Aims
We examined the degree of overlap (jangle fallacy) between the Statistics Anxiety Rating Scale (STARS) and the Revised Mathematics Anxiety Rating Scale (R-MARS).

Samples
Two cohorts of UK undergraduate psychology students participated: Study 1 (n = 489) and Study 2 (n = 245).

Methods
Each study combined a cross-sectional survey with a between-participants experiment. Surveys included the STARS, R-MARS, parallel forms to control for scale content and measures of trait and state anxiety. In the experiment, participants were randomly assigned to complete either a statistics or mathematics multiple-choice test, with state anxiety measured before and after.

Results
Results pointed to overlap across all analyses and samples. Scales were highly correlated, items did not separate into distinct domains, individuals rarely reported one without the other, and state anxiety increased similarly across test types.

Conclusions
Findings show that statistics anxiety, as measured by the STARS, is not distinct from mathematics anxiety, as measured by the R-MARS. Recognizing statistics anxiety as part of the broader mathematics anxiety construct can streamline measurement, clarify theory and support more effective interventions for reducing quantitative anxieties in education.