The Relationship between Locus of Control, Test Anxiety, and Religious Orientation among Iranian EFL Students

doi:10.4236/ojml.2013.31009

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Open Journal of Modern Linguistics

2013. Vol.3, No.1, 73-78

Published Online March 2013 in SciRes (http://www.scirp.org/journal/ojml) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojml.2013.31009

The Relationship between Locus of Control, Test Anxiety, and

Religious Orientation among Iranian EFL Students

Mina Rastegar, Nahid Heidari

Foreign Language Department, Shahid Bahonar University, Kerman, Iran

Email: [email protected]

Received October 31st, 2011; revised December 26th, 2011; accepted January 4th, 2012

The present study was designed to investigate the relationship between locus of control (LOC), religious

orientation (RO) and test anxiety (TA) among Iranian EFL learners. Furthermore, it scrutinized the role of

gender on these variables. To achieve such goals, 100 Iranian EFL students (57 females, 43 males) study-

ing English at Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman participated in the study. These students were ran-

domly selected from among junior and senior students majoring in English Translation and English Lit-

erature. In order to obtain the required data, three questionnaires were utilized: Rotters’s (1966) locus of

control scale (LOCS) to measure participants’ level of LOC, Sarason’s (1975) test anxiety scale (TAS) to

measure participants’ TA, and Allport and Ross’s (1967) Religious Orientation Scale (ROS) to determine

participants’ intrinsic or extrinsic religious orientation. For analysis of data, the Pearson Product Moment

Correlation and T-test were used. The results revealed that there was a significant negative relationship

between ILOC and TA and a significant positive relationship between ELOC and TA. Furthermore, there

was a significant positive relationship between ILOC and IRO and a significant positive relationship be-

tween ELOC and ERO. Also, there was a significant negative relationship between ILOC and TA, and a

significant positive relationship between ELOC and TA. Finally, there were not any significant differ-

ences among males and females regarding ILOC, ELOC, TA, IRO, and ERO.

Keywords: Locus of Control (LOC); Test Anxiety (TA); Religious Orientation (RO); Gender

Introduction

It is undoubtedly true that learners bring many individual

characteristics to the learning process which will affect both the

way in which they learn and the outcomes of that process. Lo-

cus of control (LOC), test anxiety (TA), and religious orienta-

tion (RO) are among these characteristics, and their relationship

will be investigated in this study.

The question of whether or not we control our own fate has

been the topic of debate for centuries. Religion and literature

have both had a long history of trying to discern what forces

shape our future. As early as the Ancient Greek times, philoso-

phers and writers focused on the idea of fate and free will.

While some find the idea of having a greater power drive our

lives comforting, others find it frightening. Further, there are

those who rely on the idea of not being in control of their lives

to justify their actions or explain their misfortunes. Because of

the mixed emotions surrounding fate, destiny, and free choice,

numerous works from the ancient times until now focus on

locus of control (LOC).

The concept of locus of control was first introduced by Rot-

ter (1966). LOC (Rotter, 1966) is conceptualized on a dynamic

bipolar continuum spanning from internal to external. Internal

locus of control (ILOC) is characterized by the belief that con-

sequences are a result of one’s own behavior. In other words,

individuals who believe that their successes or failures result

from their own behaviors possess an internal locus of control.

On the other hand, external locus of control (ELOC) is charac-

terized by the belief that consequences are a result of fate, luck,

or powerful others. In other words, individuals who attribute

their successes or failures to something incongruent with their

own behaviors possess an external locus of control.

The second variable of this study is test anxiety. Test anxiety

refers to worry, apprehension, palpitation, increase in pulse rate

and other physiologic symptoms during the exam. (Abolghasemi,

Asadi, Moghadam, Najarian, & Shokrkon, 1996; Vitasari, Nubli,

Othman, Herrawan, & Sinnadurai, 2010). TA negatively affects

academic performance. According to Sarason and Sarason

(1990), High-test-anxious students express concern about the

consequences of not performing at a satisfactory level on major

exams and embarrassment at probable failure. Also, test-anx-

ious college students, relative to their low-test-anxious coun-

terparts, report suffering from poor mental health and psycho-

somatic symptoms (Depreeuw & DeNeve, 1992). Spielberger

(1972) reported that students who are high in test anxiety tend

to have poor study habits and test taking skills.

The third variable of this study is religious orientation (RO).

Religious orientation has been defined as the “extent to which a

person lives out his/her religious beliefs” (Allport & Ross, 1967:

p. 433). Allport and Ross (1967) originally conceptualized reli-

gious orientation as a single construct varying along a contin-

uum between intrinsic and extrinsic belief systems. More ex-

trinsically oriented individuals “use religion to their own needs”

(Allport & Ross, 1967: p. 434), and “Persons with intrinsic

religious orientation find their master motive in religion” (All-

port & Ross, 1967: p. 434).

The relationship among I-E LOC, TA, and I-E RO, will be

investigated in this study. Furthermore, this study scrutinizes

the role of gender on these variables.

M. RASTEGAR, N. HEIDARI

Literature Review

Relationship between LOC and TA

In the literature, external LOC is typically positively corre-

lated with TA (Archer, 1979; Beekman et al., 2000; Berrenberg,

1987; Gabbard, Howard, & Tageson, 1986; Moore, 2006;

Watson, 1967). Similar findings occurred among college stu-

dents (Watson, 1967), older adults (Beekman et al., 2000), ado-

lescents, army recruits, alcoholics, and emotionally disturbed

children (see Archer, 1979 review).

Furthermore, Berrenberg’s (1987) study of undergraduates

relating a scale of exaggerated internal LOC to test anxiety

found a negative correlation between internal LOC and test

anxiety. However, in another investigation, the relationship be-

tween locus of control, procrastination and anxiety revealed

that internals experienced higher academic procrastination and

test anxiety than externals (Carden, Bryant, & Moss, 2004).

Relationship between LOC and RO

The first substantial investigation of the relationship between

religious orientation and locus of control was conducted by

Strickland and Shaffer (1971). Strickland and Shaffer (1971)

found that locus of control, measured as extent of externality,

and internal religious orientation were negatively correlated (r

= −.30). Moreover, research indicated intrinsic religiousness is

positively related to internal LOC (Kahoe, 1974; Strickland &

Shaffer, 1971, Sturgeon & Hamley, 1979).

However, in a study by McIntosh, Kojetin, and Spilka (1985),

involving students enrolled in an introductory psychology

course at the University of Denver, no significant correlation

was found between E-I LOC and religious orientation. It is

possible that this result may have been due to the use of an

instrument specifically designed for people with some form of

religious involvement, with a sample of subjects not representa-

tive of the latter.

Relationship b et we e n RO and TA

Typically, intrinsic religiousness is negatively related to test

anxiety (Baker & Gorsuch, 1982; Bergin, Masters, & Richards,

1987; Koenig, Moberg, & Kvale, 1988; Maltby, Lewis, & Day

1999; Sturgeon & Hamley, 1979). Furthermore, in most studies,

extrinsic religiousness is positively related to test anxiety (Baker

& Gorsuch, 1982; Bergin et al., 1987; Watson et al., 2002).

However, some non-significant results for the relation be-

tween intrinsic religiousness and test anxiety have also been

found in samples of American, English, and Iranian college

students (Maltby & Day, 2000; Watson et al., 2002).

LOC, TA, RO, and Gender

Results on gender differences in locus of control have varied.

Nowicki and Strickland (1973) found a negative relationship

between the locus of control and achievement of children in

grades 3 - 12. As achievement scores went up, external scores

went down, and this was mostly found in males. McLaughlin

and Saccuzzo (1997) found that gender effects were apparent

with females showing a slight but significantly greater internal

locus of control. Young and Shorr (1986) found that females

tend to attribute both success and failure outcomes to internal

causes significantly more often than males.

Regarding the relationship between test anxiety and gender,

(Hembree, 1988; Lashkaripour, Bakhshani, & Soleymani, 2007;

Mousavi, Haghshenas, & Alishahi, 2008; Putwain, 2007; Zeid-

ner, 1998) investigated the relationship between test anxiety,

academic achievement, and gender. The results of this study

showed that, test anxiety occurred in girls more than boys and

this difference was significant. On the other hand, there are

some contradictory results regarding gender and TA. Fan, Chen,

and Matsumoto (1997), Hyde, Fennema, and Lamon (1990),

Pajares and Graham (1999) explored the relationship between

TA and gender and reported that the differences among females

and males regarding TA were non-significant and slight.

Regarding RO and gender, it is commonly accepted that

women are more religious than men. Numerous surveys going

back at least a century have repeatedly found this to be the case

(Beit-Hallahmi & Argyle, 1997; Brown, 1987; Francis, 1997;

Paloutzian, 1996; Walter & Davie, 1998). Batson, Schoenrade,

and Ventis’s overview (1993), on predominantly Christian sam-

ples, reported higher levels of attendance and Bible study

among women than among men. Beit-Hallahmi and Argyle

(1997) concluded that there were higher levels of religious

involvement, prayer, experience and overall religiosity among

women compared to men, and suggested that these gender dif-

ferences may be a reflection of greater opportunity among wo-

men for religious activity, or perhaps of differences in person-

ality and socialization.

Research Questions

This study aims at seeking answers to the following major

and minor research questions.

Major Resear ch Questions

1) Is there any relationship between internal-external locus of

control and test anxiety among Iranian EFL learners?

2) Is there any relationship between internal-external locus of

control and intrinsic-extrinsic religious orientation among Ira-

nian EFL learners?

3) Is there any relationship between intrinsic-extrinsic reli-

gious orientation and test anxiety among Iranian EFL learners?

Mino r Research Question

4) Are there any differences among males and females con-

sidering internal locus of control, external locus of control, test

anxiety, intrinsic religious orientation, and extrinsic religious

orientation?

Methodology

Participants

One hundred Iranian EFL students studying at the depart-

ment of foreign languages of Shahid Bahonar University of

Kerman took part in this study. These students, including both

males and females, were randomly selected from junior and

senior students majoring in English Translation and English

Literature. Among the sample population, there were fifty

seven females (57%) and forty three males (43%).

Instruments

In order to obtain the required data on the variables locus of

M. RASTEGAR, N. HEIDARI

control, test anxiety, and religious orientation, three question-

naires were utilized:

1) Locus of Control Scale (Rotter, 1966);

2) Test Anxiety Scale (Sarason, 1975);

3) Religious Orientation Scale (Allport & Ross, 1967).

Locus of Control Scale (Rotter, 1966)

Rotter’s (1966) LOC scale was used to measure an individ-

ual’s internal-external orientation. The scale is referred to as the

I-E scale and provides a measure of individual differences in a

generalized belief for internal versus external control of rein-

forcement. It is a two-point scale and participants are supposed

to select choice (a) or (b) in each part. The scale consists of 29

items. Of the 29 items, 23 related to internal-external expectan-

cies, and 6 are filler items intended to disguise the purpose of

the test. Students’ answers can range from 1 to 23, and the

scores obtained from this scale were divided into two groups by

the researcher in order to make the analysis of the data easier.

Scores from 1 - 10 indicated ILOC and scores above 10 indi-

cated ELOC. Item and factor analyses indicated high internal

consistency, test-retest reliability was satisfactory, and the test

correlated satisfactorily with other method of assessing the

same variable (Rotter, 1966).

The Test Anxiety Scale (Sarason, 1975)

Sarason’s (1975) test anxiety scale (TAS) was used as the

research tool to determine the students’ degree of test anxiety.

Sarason’s (1975) TAS is a Likert scale with 37 items which

reflect the multi-componential aspects of test anxiety (Zeinder,

1998). The items are based on the evidence that test anxiety is

composed of test-relevant and test-irrelevant thinking. Re-

sponses range from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely

agree). For each item, the highest degree of anxiety receives

five points and the lowest, one point. Students’ scores can range

from 37 to 185, the greater the number, the stronger the degree

of test anxiety. The TAS is a reliable instrument in identifying

students’ anxiety experience in language learning. The internal

consistency measure of TAS showed an alpha coefficient of .90

(Aydin, Karakuza, & Elkilik, 2009).

Religious Orientation Scale (Allport & Ross, 1967)

Allport and Ross’s (1967) Religious Orientation Scale (ROS)

was used to determine the participants’ I-E RO. The scale con-

sists of 20 items divided into two subscales, intrinsic and ex-

trinsic. The intrinsic sub-scale has 9 items, while the extrinsic

sub-scale has 11items.The questions were answered using a 5

point Likert scale and responses range from 1 (strongly dis-

agree) to 5 ( strongly agree). Students’ answers can range from

9 to 45 in IRO subscale and 11 to 55 in ERO subscale. The

Religious Orientation Scale has demonstrated good psychomet-

ric properties, with high internal consistency for both subscales

(Hill & Hood, 1999). Hill and Hood (1999) noted that the in-

trinsic subscale has been found to be more internally consistent

than the extrinsic, with α > .80 and α > .70, respectively.

Data Collection

The present study was carried out during the class time in the

second semester of the academic year (2011). The question-

naires were distributed among the participants by one of the

researchers. Participants were given 35 minutes time to answer

the questionnaires and there were accompanying instructions.

They were informed that the information would be used for

research purposes and they were assured that they will be kept

completely confidential.

Pearson Product Moment Correlation analysis was used to

seek any meaningful relations between the variables locus of

control, test anxiety, and religious orientation, and independent

sample T-test was used to find any significant differences be-

tween males and females regarding these three psychological

factors.

Results and Discussion

The Descriptive Statistics of the variables of the study (LOC,

TA, and RO) and students’ gender are presented in Tables 1

and 2 respectively.

According to Table 2, the collected data shows that 43 per-

cent out of 100 students were male and 57 percent were female

(Table 2).

As can be observed in Table 3, there is a significant negative

relationship between ILOC and TA (P-value = .003, r = −.29),

and there is a significant positive relationship between ELOC

and TA (P-value = .007, r = .27).

According to Table 4, there is a significant positive rela-

tionship between ILOC and IRO (P-value = .000, r = .49), and

there is a significant positive relationship between ELOC and

ERO (P-value = .000, r = .39).

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics of the variables.

N Range Minimum Maximum Mean SD Variance

ILOC 100 10 1 10 6.15 2.77 7.72

ELOC 100 9 11 20 15.25 2.88 8.35

TA 100 85 60 145 101.4 23.27 541.5

IRO 100 39 9 42 28.72 13.38 178.8

ERO 100 36 15 51 34.07 10.56 111.6

Valid N 100

Table 2.

The frequency distribution of the participants’ gender.

Frequency Percent Valid percent Cumulative percent

Valid Male 43 43 43 43

Female 57 57 57 100

Total 100 100 100

M. RASTEGAR, N. HEIDARI

Table 3.

Correlations of the variables I-ELOC and TA.

ILOC TA

ILOC

Pearson correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)

100

−.29**

.003

100

Pearson correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)

−.29**

.003

100

ELOC TA

ELOC

Pearson correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)

100

.27**

.007

100

Pearson correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)

.27**

.007

100

Note: **Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed).

Table 4.

Correlations of the variables I-ELOC and I-E RO.

ILOC IRO

ILOC

Pearson correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)

100

.49**

100

IRO

Pearson correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)

.49**

100

ELOC ERO

ELOC

Pearson correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)

100

.39**

100

ERO

Pearson correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)

.39**

100

Note: **Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed).

As can be observed in Table 5, there is a significant negative

relationship between ILOC and TA (P-value = .000, r = −.80),

and there is a significant positive relationship between TA and

ERO (P-value = .000, r = .59).

An Independent Sample T-test was applied to compare the

means of locus of control, test anxiety, and religious orientation

in two groups of males and females. P-Value in all the variables

is above the significant level of α = .05. So the results indicated

that there were no significant differences between two groups

of males and females regarding locus of control, test anxiety,

and religious orientation (Table 6 ).

Discussion

In this section, the research questions presented in this article

are dealt with one by one. Each question will be answered

based on the findings of the study. Because LOC and RO are

bipolar concepts, they will be discussed separately as (I-E LOC

and I-E RO) in this section. The first research question asked

whether there was any relationship between LOC orientation

and TA. The results revealed that there was a significant nega-

tive relationship between ILOC and TA. Regarding the nega-

tive relationship between ILOC and TA, the finding of this

study is in line with Berrenberg’s study (1987) who found

similar results. However, this finding contrasts with some other

studies. For example, Carden et al. (2004) found that internals

experienced higher academic procrastination and test anxiety

than externals. Regarding the positive relationship between

ELOC and TA, the result of this study is in line with some other

studies. For example (Archer, 1979; Beekman et al., 2000; Gab-

bard, Howard, & Tageson, 1986; Moore, 2006; Watson, 1967)

found the same results. However, Carden et al. (2004) found a

negative relationship between ELOC and test anxiety.

The second research question asked whether there was any

relationship between LOC orientation and RO. The results re-

vealed that there was a significant positive relationship between

ILOC and IRO. Strickland and Shaffer (1971), Kahoe (1974),

and Sturgeon and Hamley (1979) found the similar results.

However, the result of this study contrasts with some other

studies. For example McIntosh et al. (1985) found a negative

relationship between ILOC and IRO. Also, the results revealed

that there was a significant positive relationship between ELOC

and ERO. According to Strickland and Shaffer (1971), ERO

was positively related to ELOC, specifically controlled by

powerful others and chance. However, McIntosh et al. (1985)

reported that no significant correlation was found between

ELOC and ERO.

The third research question asked whether there was any re-

lationship between RO and TA. The results revealed that there

was a significant negative relationship between IRO and TA.

The finding of this study support previous established results.

For example (Baker & Gorsuch, 1982; Bergin et al., 1987;

M. RASTEGAR, N. HEIDARI

Table 5.

Correlations of the variables TA and I-ERO.

TA IRO

Pearson correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)

100

−.80**

100

IRO

Pearson correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)

−.80**

100

TA ERO

Pearson correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)

100

.59**

100

ERO

Pearson correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)

.59**

100

Note: **Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed).

Table 6.

Gender differences and the variables LOC, TA, and RO.

P-value (sig) df Statistics T SD Mean N Gender

2.01 6.42 43 Male .40 98 −.83

3.24 5.95 57 Female

ILOC

3.60 15.60 43 Male .21 98 −1.23

2.83 14.80 57 Female

ELOC

23.14 99.12 43 Male .38 98 .87

23.41 103.25 57 Female

13.29 29.67 43 Male .54 98 .615

13.63 28.00 57 Female

IRO

10.73 34.21 43 Male .91 98 −.114

10.53 33.96 57 Female

ERO

Koenig et al., 1988; Maltby et al., 1999; Sturgeon & Hamley,

1979) found the similar results. However, Maltby and Day

(2000) and Watson et al. (2002) did not find any significant

relationship between IRO and TA. Also, the results revealed

that there was a significant positive relationship between ERO

and TA. Baker and Gorsuch (1982), Bergin et al. (1987), Wat-

son et al. (2002) found similar results. However, Maltby and

Day (2000) did not find any significant relationship between

ERO and TA.

The last research question asked whether there were any dif-

ferences among males and females regarding ILOC, ELOC, TA,

IRO, and ERO. The results revealed that there were not any sig-

nificant differences among males and females regarding gender.

First, regarding I-ELOC and gender, the results of this study

contrast with what McLaughlin and Saccuzzo (1997), and Young

and Shorr (1986) found. They reported that females tended to

attribute both success and failure outcomes to internal causes

significantly more often than males.

Second, regarding test anxiety and gender, there are some

studies that are in line with the findings of this study. For ex-

ample (Fan et al., 1997; Hyde et al., 1990; Pajares & Graham,

1999) reported that the differences among females and males

regarding TA were non-significant and slight. However some

other studies by Lashkaripour et al. (2007) and Mousavi et al.

(2008) found that TA occurred in girls more than boys.

Third, regarding I-E RO, the findings of this study contrast

with some other studies. For instance, according to (Batson et

al., 1993; Beit-Hallahmi & Argyle, 1997; Brown, 1987; Francis,

1997; Paloutzian, 1996; Walter & Davie, 1998) women are

concluded to be more religiously-active than men.

Conclusion

This study sets out to find out 1) relationship between LOC

orientation, TA, and RO among Iranian EFL learners; 2) the ef-

fects of gender on LOC orientation, TA, and gender. The find-

ings of this study revealed that there was a significant nega-

tive relationship between ILOC and TA, and there was a sig-

nificant positive relationship between ELOC and TA. Further-

more, there was a significant positive relationship between

ILOC and IRO, and there was a significant positive relationship

between ELOC and ERO. Finally, there was a significant nega-

tive relationship between IRO and TA, and a significant posi-

tive relationship between ERO and TA. The variable gender did

not prove to have a significant effect on the above-mentioned

variables.

REFERENCES

Abolghasemi, A., Asadi Moghadam, A., Najarian, B., & Shokrkon, H.

(1996). Scale reliability for measurement of test anxiety of Ahwaz’s

guidance school girls. Journal of Psychological and Educational

Sciences of Ahwaz Chamran University, 3, 61-74.

Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and

prejudice. Journal of Personality an d Social Psychology, 5, 432-443.

M. RASTEGAR, N. HEIDARI

doi:10.1037/h0021212

Archer, R. P. (1979). Relationships between locus of control and anxi-

ety. Journal of Personality Assessment, 43, 617-626.

doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4306_10

Aydin, S., Karakuza, M., & Elkilik, G. (2009). Teacher effect on the

level of test anxiety among young EFL learners. Asian EFL Journal,

Teaching Articles, 190-194.

Baker, M., & Gorsuch, R. (1982). Trait anxiety and intrinsic-extrinsic

religiousness. Journal fo r t h e S c i en t if i c S t u dy of R el i g io n , 2 1 , 119.

doi:10.2307/1385497

Batson, C. D., Schoenrade, P., & Ventis, W. L. (1993). Religion and the

Individual: A social psychological perspective. New York: Oxford

University Press.

Beekman, A. T. F., de Beurs, E., von Balkom, A. J. L. M., Deeg, D. J.

H., van Dyck, R., & van Tilburh, W. (2000). Anxiety and depression

in later life: Co-occurrence and communality of risk factors. Ameri-

can Journal of Psychiatry, 157, 89-95.

Beit-Hallahmi, B., & Argyle, M. (1997). The psychology of religious

behaviour, belief and experience. London: Routledge.

Bergin, A. E., Masters, K. S., & Richards, P. S. (1987). Religiousness

and psychological well-being re-considered: A study of an intrinsic-

cally religious sample. Journal of Counselling Psychiatry, 34, 197-

204. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.34.2.197

Berrenberg, J. L. (1987). The belief in Personal control scale: A meas-

ure of god mediated and exaggerated control. Journal of Personality

Assessment, 51, 194-206. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa5102_4

Brown, L. B. (1987). The psychology of religious belief. London: Aca-

demic Press.

Carden, R., Bryant, C., & Moss, R. (2004). Locus of control, test anxi-

ety, academic procrastination, and achievement among college stu-

dents. Psychological Reports, 95, 581-582.

doi:10.2466/pr0.95.2.581-582

Depreeuw, E., & DeNeve, H. (1992). Test anxiety can harm your heal-

th: Some conclusions based on a student typology. In D. G. Forgays,

T. Sosnowski, & K. Wrzesniewski (Eds.), Anxiety: Recent develop-

ments in cognitive, psycho physiological, and health research (pp.

211-228). Washington: Hemisphere.

Fan, X., Chen, M., & Matsumoto, A. (1997). Gender differences in

mathematics achievement: Findings from the National Education

Longitudinal Study of 1988. The Journal of Experimental Education,

65, 229-242. doi:10.1080/00220973.1997.9943456

Francis, L. J. (1993). Personality and religion among college students in

the UK. Personality and Individual Differences, 14, 619-622.

doi:10.1016/0191-8869(93)90159-Z

Gabbard, C. E., Howard, G. S., & Tageson, C. W. (1986). Assessing

locus of control with religious populations. Journal of Research in

Personality, 20, 292-308. doi:10.1016/0092-6566(86)90136-4

Hembree, R. (1988). Correlates, causes, effects, and treatment of test

anxiety. Review of Educational Research, 58 , 7-77.

Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., & Lamon, S. (1990). Gender differences in

mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin,

107, 139-155. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.139

Kahoe, R. D. (1974). Personality and achievement correlates of intrin-

sic and extrinsic religious orientations. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 29, 812-818. doi:10.1037/h0036222

Koenig, H. G., George, L. K., & Peterson, B. L. (1998). Religiosity and

remission of depression in medically ill older patients. American

Journal of Psychiatry, 155, 536-542.

Lashkaripour, K., Bakhshani, N. M., & Soleymani, M. J. (2007). The

relationship between test anxiety and academic achievement in stu-

dents of guidance school in Zahedan. Zahedan Journal of Research

in Medical, 8, 253-259.

Maltby, J., & Day, L. (2000). Depressive symptoms and religious ori-

entation: Examining the relationship between religiosity and depres-

sion within the context of other correlates of depression. Personality

and Individual Differences, 28, 383-393.

doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00108-7

Maltby, J., Lewis, C. A., & Day, L. (1999). Religion orientation and

psychological wellbeing: The role of the frequency of personal

prayer. British Journal of Health, 4, 363-378.

doi:10.1348/135910799168704

McIntosh, D. N., Kojetin, B. A., & Spilka, B. (1985). Form of personal

faith and general and specific locus of control. Annual Meeting of the

Rocky Mountains Psychological Association, Tucson, AZ, 24-27

April 1985.

McLaughlin, S. C., & Saccuzzo, D. P. (1997). Ethnic and gender dif-

ferences in locus of control in children referred for gifted programs:

The effects of vulnerability factors. Journal for the Education of the

Gifted, 20, 268-283.

Moore, M. M. (2006). Variation in test anxiety and locus of control in

achieving and underachieving gifted and nongifted middle-school

students. Doctoral Dissertation, Storrs Mansfield: University of Con-

necticut.

Mousavi, M., Hghshenas, H., & Alishahi, M. J. (2008). Effect of gen-

der, school performance, and school type on test anxiety among Ira-

nian adolesecent. Iranian Red Cresent Medical Journal (IRCMJ), 10,

4-7.

Nowicki, S., & Strickland, B. R. (1973). A locus of control scale for

children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 40, 148-

154. doi:10.1037/h0033978

Pajares, F., & Graham, L. (1999). Self-efficacy, motivation constructs,

and mathematics performance of entering middle school students.

Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 124-139.

doi:10.1006/ceps.1998.0991

Putwain, D. W. (2007). Test anxiety in UK schoolchildren: prevalence

and demographic patterns. British Journal of Educational Psychol-

ogy, 77, 579-593. doi:10.1348/000709906X161704

Paloutzian, R. F. (1996). Invitation to the psychology of religion (2nd

ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Rotter, J. B. (1954). Social learning and clinical psychology. Engle-

wood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. doi:10.1037/10788-000

Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus ex-

ternal control of reinforcement, Psychology Monographs, 80 , 1-28.

doi:10.1037/h0092976

Rotter, J. B. (1975). Some problems and misconceptions related to the

construct of internal versus external control of reinforcement. Jour-

nal of Consulting and C li ni ca l Psychology, 43, 56-67.

doi:10.1037/h0076301

Sarason, I. G. (1975). The Test Anxiety Scale: concept and research. In

I. G. Sarason, & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Stress and anxiety (pp.

193-217). Washington DC: Hemisphere.

Sarason, I. G., & Sarason, B. R. (1990). Test anxiety. In H. Leitenberg

(Ed.), Handbookof social and evaluative anxiety (pp. 475-496). New

York: Plenum Press.

Spielberger, C. D. (1972). Current trends in theory and research on

anxiety. In C. D. Spielberger (Ed.), Anxiety: Current trends in theory

and research (pp. 3-9). New York and London: Academic Press.

Strickland, B. R., & Shaffer, S. (1971). I-E, I-E, & F. Journal for the

Scientific Study of Religion, 10, 366-369. doi:10.2307/1384782

Sturgeon, R. S., & Hamley, R. W. (1979). Religiosity and anxiety. The

Journal of Social Psychology, 108, 137-138.

doi:10.1080/00224545.1979.9711977

Vitasari, P., Nubli, A. M., Othman, A., Herrawan, T., & Sinnadurai, S.

K. (2010). The relationship between study anxiety and academic

performance among engineering students. Procedia Social and Be-

havioral Sciences, 8, 490-497. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.067

Walter, T., & Davie, G. (1998). The religiosity of women in the modern

West. British Journalof Sociology, 49, 640-660.

doi:10.2307/591293

Watson, D. (1967). Relationship between locus of control and anxiety.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychol og y , 6, 91-92.

doi:10.1037/h0024490

Watson, P. J., Gborbani, N., Davison, H. K., Bing, M. N., Hood Jr., R.

W., & Ghramaleki, A. F. (2002). Negatively reinforcing orientation

inner awareness and mental health in Iran and the United States. The

International Journal for The psychol ogy of Religion, 12, 255-276.

doi:10.1207/S15327582IJPR1204_04

Young, T., & Shorr, D. N. (1986). Factors affecting locus of control in

school children. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Mono-

graphs, 112, 405-417.

Zeidner, M. (1998). Test anxiety, the state of the art. New York: Ple-

num Press.