Cited by 62Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesInnovations in Medical EducationHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout

Metacognitions, worry and attentional control in predicting OSCE performance test anxiety

O’Carroll, Pierce J, Fisher, Peter·2013·Medical Education

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the applicability of the self-regulatory executive functioning (S-REF) model to performance test anxiety (PTA) in objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs). Specifically, it examined the relative contributions of metacognitive beliefs, trait worry and attentional control to PTA. METHODS: A cross-sectional design was used. Immediately prior to their formative Communication for Clinical Practice OSCE, 240 Year 1 medical students completed the following self-report questionnaires: the Metacognitions Questionnaire-30 (MCQ-30); the Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ); the Attentional Control Scale (ACS), and the Performance Test Anxiety questionnaire (PTA). RESULTS: Univariate analysis indicated that female students scored significantly more highly than male students on the MCQ-30 subscale for negative beliefs about the uncontrollability and danger of worry, the MCQ-30 subscale for cognitive confidence and the PSWQ subscale for trait worry. Partial correlations (controlling for gender) showed that metacognitions, worry and attentional control were significantly correlated with PTA. Multiple regression analyses showed that worry and negative beliefs about the uncontrollability and danger of worry were independent predictors of PTA in both male and female students, whereas attention focus was an independent predictor only in male students. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support predictions derived from the S-REF model that metacognitive beliefs, trait worry and attentional control processes underlie the onset and maintenance of PTA.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/medu.12125

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Findings in mental health settings demonstrate that metacognitive beliefs are associated with anxiety and depression and that negative metacognitive beliefs of uncontrollability and danger show the strongest and most reliable relationships with these symptoms.

    “The results of the review mirror findings in mental health settings, which demonstrate that metacognitive beliefs are associated with anxiety and depression [29, 70–77] and that negative metacognitive beliefs of uncontrollability and danger show the strongest and most reliable relationships with these symptoms [29].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
O’Carroll, P. J., & Fisher, P.
Affiliations
University of Liverpool (GB)
Venue
Medical Education
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-05-12
Volume
47
Issue
6
Pages
562-568
ISSN
  • 0308-0110 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2923
OpenAlex
W2143557444
Cited by
62
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2
FWCI
4.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Medical Education (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Keywords
metacognition, metacognitive beliefs, trait worry, attentional control, OSCE, medical students, gender differences, attentional focus, cognitive confidence
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Anxiety, Attention, Attitude of Health Personnel, Cognition, Cross-Sectional Studies, Education, Medical, Educational Measurement, Female, Humans, Male, Models, Psychological, Regression Analysis, Students, Medical, Test Anxiety Scale, Sex Distribution, Young Adult, Executive Function, Self Report, Performance Anxiety

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