Cited by 52Student Stress and CopingStress and Burnout ResearchEducation, Achievement, and Giftedness

Exams? Why worry? Interpreting anxiety as facilitative and stress appraisals

Strack, Juliane, Esteves, Francisco·2015·Anxiety, Stress, & Coping

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The present study examined why people differ in how they appraise the same stressful situation (an approaching exam). DESIGN: We explored whether interpreting anxiety as a facilitative emotion can affect the type of stress appraisal people make. METHOD: One hundred and three undergraduate students took part in this study, which lasted for 10 days (leading up to an exam). The students completed a daily self-reported evaluation of anxiety, emotional exhaustion, and stress experienced. RESULTS: The findings suggest a process by which a stressful time can be experienced as motivating rather than threatening or emotionally exhausting. For example, interpreting anxiety as facilitative moderated the relationship between anxiety and stress appraisals. When interpreting their anxiety as facilitative, individuals showed a higher tendency to make challenge stress appraisals and a lower tendency to appraising the stressor as a threat. These differences were especially visible with high levels of anxiety. Furthermore, interpreting anxiety as facilitative was negatively associated with emotional exhaustion, but positively associated with the academic performance. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest an explanation why people differ in how they appraise the same stressor: how people interpret their anxiety may to a large part affect how they appraise difficult events and situations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10615806.2014.931942

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Strack, J., & Esteves, F.
Affiliations
Iscte – Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (PT)
Corresponding author
Strack, Juliane
Venue
Anxiety, Stress, & Coping
Published
2014-07-08
Volume
28
Issue
2
Pages
205-214
ISSN
  • 1061-5806 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-2205
OpenAlex
W1980684278
Cited by
52
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2
FWCI
3.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Anxiety Stress & Coping (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Repositório do ISCTE-IUL (submittedVersion)
Funders
Portugal's Foundation for Science and Technology
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Student Stress and Coping
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
Keywords
anxiety, stress appraisal, threat appraisal, emotional exhaustion, academic performance, exam stress, individual differences
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Anxiety, Educational Measurement, Emotions, Female, Humans, Male, Motivation, Stress, Psychological, Students, Young Adult, Self Report

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review