Running head: Critical Review 1

Critical Review of Article:

Worry, Intolerance of Uncertainty, and Statistics Anxiety

By Amanda S. Williams

[NAME]

[COURSE]

[DATE]

[PROFESSOR NAME]

[CITY]
Running head: Critical Review 2

Summary of Article
The article titled Worry, Intolerance of Uncertainty and Statistics Anxiety by Amanda

S. Williams studies how students who are pursuing a graduate degree look to delay and

procrastinate on taking statistics classes as late as possible. The article stipulates the fact that

it is seen that students have worry and have an intolerance to uncertainty which are seen to be

the major factors why students are anxious in terms of their studying experience around

statistics related studies. The goal of the study was to identify the relationship that existed

between the factors of intolerance of uncertainty, worry and the anxiety related to statistics

related studies (Williams, 2013).

This relationship was seen to be significant in its nature and there was a chain seen

between the fact that students had an intolerance to the uncertainty which led to worry being

exhibited by the students which contributed to leading to statistics related anxiety in the

students. In order to carry out the study, there were six different dimensions which were

identified which were used in order to measure the statistics related anxiety being seen in the

students (Williams, 2013). These six factors were categorized as fear of asking for help, fear

of the statistics teacher, computation self-concept, test and class anxiety, worth of statistics in

graduate degree and interpretation anxiety.

The study was carried out with the formulation of three hypotheses which assumed

that the tests taken by the students to qualify as participants for the study showed that there

was an intolerance of uncertainty which was significantly correlated to worry being seen in

the students and this worry was correlated to the six measures of statistic anxiety classified by

Williams. Once it was seen that these six dimensions were being fulfilled, it was also seen

that levels of intolerance of uncertainty had an impact on the worry and statistic related

anxiety of the students. Once the tests were carried out, it was seen that the participants who

took the test saw reduced level of anxiety and stress after the tests were carried out.
Running head: Critical Review 3

The participants who had been chosen as participants for the study were studying at a

large public university who were currently enrolled in an introductory statistics course. There

were a total of 97 students who were made part of the study and the students were given a test

before and after their completed their statistics course. In order to survey the students, a

questionnaire was designed and a statistical analysis was carried out on the data collected

through these questionnaires (Williams, 2013). The results of the questionnaires were kept

anonymous when the questionnaires were administered before and after the statistics course.

In order to present the data, descriptive statistics were used to give mean, standard deviation

and other measures on worry, statistical anxiety and intolerance of uncertainty and the six

dimensions that the data was collected on. In addition to that Pearson’s R coefficients were

calculated for the two hypotheses, a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and

ANOVA as a follow up were carried out for the third hypothesis that was developed.

Based on the tests carried out, it was seen that the intolerance of uncertainty was

significantly correlated to worry and statistical anxiety being exhibited by the students. The

second hypothesis formulated that the six dimensions of statistical anxiety were partially

supported in the data analysis that was carried out. Lastly, it was seen that there was partial

support in the fact that the students showed lower levels of intolerance of uncertainty, worry

and anxiety related to statistics once the test was carried out before and after the statistics

course was taken. The discussion carried out in the paper shows that two of the hypotheses

are partially supported as social fears like asking for help or approaching a teacher are more

social in nature rather than being related to statistics related anxiety (Williams, 2013). The

results of the study cannot be generalized over a large population as this study was limited in

scope but with development of better variables and untested aspects of anxiety and worry, a

more holistic research can be carried out as other variables can have an impact on statistics

anxiety as well.
Running head: Critical Review 4

Critical Review of Article

Purpose

The purpose of the study that was carried out was stated as part of the introduction to

the article and defines what the study is going to investigate (Coughlan, Cronin & Ryan,

2007). The article by Williams described the problem which was being studied by failed to

define a set purpose of the study after the introduction had been made and the literature

review was being defined. The research question posed by the research is stated as a separate

part of the article in Section 3. Once the purpose has been stated, the article progresses from

that to then discuss the methodology, instruments used for study, processes, results of the

study, discussion of the paper and final conclusions of the study.

Literature Review

The literature review that is carried out should look to develop the research question

that has already been posed in the introduction and then study past researches to see how

other authors have collected the data and analyzed the data for their researches (Coughlan,

Cronin & Ryan, 2007). The literature review defined in the article by Williams is clear and

concise in terms of its literature review as it gives a context for the research being carried out

under the topic of statistics related anxiety. The selection of the students is defined as being

the students who were chosen from the fall and spring semester of the university for 2010. As

the research was carried out for data related to 2010, most of the literature that was from

1980s and 1990s. The majority of the researches that were studied were empirical in nature

and carried out most of the researches themselves. The literature review did not go into depth

of the different strengths and weaknesses of the different types of researches that were

reviewed and did not address any key words that could be used to retrieve these articles. The

literature review was able to define themes that were similar to the current research and the
Running head: Critical Review 5

ones that contrasted with the research in order to provide some context and relevance to the

research being carried out.

Hypotheses

The hypotheses that were formulated by the research look to create a link between the

past researches that had been carried out and the procedures which were followed to carry out

the current research (Coughlan, Cronin & Ryan, 2007). The purpose of the hypothesis is to

align the past researches that have been discussed in the literature review and then align the

current research in context of past literature. This research looked to develop three different

hypothesis which were consistent with the literature review that was carried and were

developed like the sections of literature review for alignment and better understanding.

Ethical Standards

In terms of the ethical standards being followed, the researchers have to make sure

that the safety, anonymity and confidentiality of the participants is kept (Coughlan, Cronin &

Ryan, 2007). These issues have been addressed by Williams as part of Section 4.1 and

Section 4.3. The data collection from participants and the nature of research and the

participants is provided by Williams and defines that the data that will be collected will be

anonymous and will be kept safe and confidential. It is also stated that all the participants of

the study will be treated equally which shows that ethical standards were adhered to.

Operational Definitions

In order to better explain the research, researchers can develop definitions for their

audience to understand and grasp the research. Williams discusses different concepts and

terms to allow the information to be presented in terms that others can understand.

Definitions and understandings of many of the concepts were also provided in the literature

review, methodology and discussion sections of the research.

Running head: Critical Review 6

Methodology

The methodology being followed by the research was well defined in Section 4 of the

paper with supplementary data presented in results and discussion section of the paper

(Coughlan, Cronin & Ryan, 2007). Williams described the instruments being used which had

been used in the past as well which measured intolerance of uncertainty, statistical anxiety

and worry. Previous data collected and research carried out was used in the current research

as instruments to link the past researches to the current one. The validity and reliability of the

analysis carried out were also discussed as the reliability and validity of each instrument was

considered. No pilot study had been carried out before the final study was carried out and

past tests and researches were used in order to use the same instruments in this research.

Data Analysis and Results

The analysis and results of a study should define all the statistical tests that have been

carried out in the research and then present the results of the tests. Descriptive statistics were

used by Williams in collaboration with Pearson’s R correlation. In addition to that,

Benferroni adjustment was used in order to create a control group for the family wise error

rate. Multivariate analysis of variance and ANOVA as a follow up were also carried out. The

results were presented in the form of charts and graphs for a visual understanding of the

results. The percentage of participants who take part in the study help define the applicability

of the research and it was seen that all the participants of the research bore results for the

article. Based on the lowest level of significance being used and adjusting it for error, it was

seen that one hypothesis was supported while two other hypotheses were partially supported.

Discussion

The discussion section of the article should relate the results of the research to the

literature review that was carried out (Coughlan, Cronin & Ryan, 2007). The literature review

of the current research was linked to the results to provide context to the present study. The
Running head: Critical Review 7

goal of the study and previous researches were discussed in this section to see how the

findings of the study compared to past researches. Based on the tests, it was seen that

hypothesis linking intolerance of uncertainty was seen to be significantly correlated to worry

in statistics students. The hypothesis that worry is correlated to six dimensions of statistics

related anxiety was partially supported while reductions in level of intolerance of uncertainty,

statistical anxiety and worry were before and after the course was carried out was partially

supported as well. The limitations and the generalized applicability of the research were also

discussed with the recommendations for future researches to be added. The conclusions

stated that in order to carry out a more holistic research, other variables need to be studied

which can have an impact on statistics related anxiety.

References

The references that were used by Williams seem to presented in an accurate manner

and were cited completely within the article and in the list of references. Still, the in-text

citations failed to state the page numbers on the in-text citations where they were made.

Conclusion

In conclusion it can be stated that if more recent articles were used in the research, the

strengths and weaknesses of different types of literature in the literature review and better

reasoning for statistical analysis used could improve the quality of the paper. Still, it can be

seen that based on the validity and reliability of instruments used and the quality of literature

used in the research, the article is well researched and grounded in alignment to past

researches.
Running head: Critical Review 8

References
Coughlan, M., Cronin, P., & Ryan, F. (2007). Step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part

1: quantitative research. British journal of nursing, 16(11), 658-663.

Williams, A. S. (2013). Worry, intolerance of uncertainty, and statistics anxiety. Statistics

Education Research Journal, 12(1).