Science Anxiety

Keywords: Science_Anxiety

THE BEGINNINGS

In 1978, as a young assistant professor at Loyola University Chicago, I became aware that some students were doing poorly, although it seemed to me that they were bright and hardworking. What was going on? The term “science anxiety” leapt into mind, and I coined it forthwith. I hearkened back to my own days as an undergraduate physics major. I experienced crippling panic on exams, and did so poorly that my advisor told me that I was not smart enough to become a physicist. In the early 1970’s, the concept of math anxiety had been recognized and various measures were being taken to alleviate it, including “clinics”: small groups of math- anxious students working with mathematicians and psychologists. I proposed to the Loyola Counseling Center that we try a Science Anxiety Clinic. We did, and it worked. You can find the details in my first book, Science Anxiety https://www.ebay.com/p/419428. It’s from 1986, but most of it is still relevant.

SO WHAT EXACTLY IS SCIENCE ANXIETY?

The psychology of anxiety was considered as early as 1844 by the Danish philosopher Søren Kirkegaard in his book Begrebet Angest (The Concept of Anxiety). He distinguished between fear (frygt) and anxiety (angest). Fear deals with things of which there is good reason to be afraid, such as a viper in your bed. Anxiety on the other hand means being scared of something that is not intrinsically fearful. Science anxiety is not a viper in your bed. But to a science-anxious person, it feels like it. Many students suffer from science anxiety, affecting their studies, excluding them from careers where science and math are prerequisites, and leaving them uninformed citizens whose political decisions are not based on good information or careful analysis. So is science anxiety an inborn deficiency that the student has to accept as narrowing his or her potential course of study? No. There are ways to diminish rather than create or enhance anxiety. The causes of science anxiety are many, including past bad experiences in science classes, science-anxious teachers in primary and secondary schools, a lack of role models, gender and racial stereotyping, and the stereotyping of scientists in the popular media. One of the strongest causes of science anxiety is gender bias, and my colleages and I have spent a large fraction of our work studying the causes and proposing the remedies for this.

We have also found strong correlations between students’ attitudes towards science and their science anxiety. These are by and large also affected by gender.

THE DANISH CONNECTION

In 1987 I received a message from Karin Beyer, a faculty member at Roskilde University, Denmark. She and several other science teachers of university and gymnasium (approximately equivalent to high school), several females and one male, would be coming to a meeting in Arbor, Michigan on gender and science education, and could they pass through Chicago and meet me? It turns out they had read my book Science Anxiety and were especially interested in my take on gender. So we met, and the rest is history. Here’s the history. We really clicked, both intellectually and personally, and established regular contact. In 1988, they invited my wife Ann and me to visit. There I met with a large variety of educators, and all in all had a great time. When we got home, Ann said, “Get a leave of absence, get a a grant, and get us over there.” It took almost three years, but we did it (studying Danish in the meantime). In 1991, I was awarded a Fulbright Fellowship to Denmark and a visiting professorship at Roskilde. My Danish colleagues and I investigated science anxiety among university students, with special attention to gender differences. We later expanded these studies to gymnasiums and teachers’ colleges. Ann and I also became very good friends with some of of the “Ann Arbor Group”, Karin Beyer, Mette Vedelsby, Sussanne Blegaa, and Helene Sørensen. The one male, Bjørn Felsager, was also a good friend, but sadly, he is no longer with us. Since then we have returned many times, twice for a semester as a vsiting professor at Roskilde, and the rest for more research on science anxiety and for visits with friends.

In 1996, at a Nordic science educators’ conference in Sweden, I had the good fortune to meet a Danish mathematician and physicist who expressed the desire to work with me. His name is Helge Kastrup, and we have become colleagues and best friends. He and I have published two books and numerous papers, as well as given many talks at venues spanning the US and the Nordic countries.

Our first book is on general science anxiety (dedicated to the memory of Bjørn Felsager):

Student Attitudes, Student Anxieties, and How to Address Them: A Handbook for Science Teachers, H. Kastrup and J. V. Mallow, London: Institute of Physics (2016) https://iopscience.iop.org/book/mono/978-1-6817-4265-6.pdf

Our second book is on physics anxiety in particular:

Fear of Physics, H. Kastrup and J. V. Mallow, London: Institute of Physics (2023). https://store.ioppublishing.org/page/detail/Fear-of-Physics//?k=9780750348645

SOME PUBLICATIONS

This is a (very) abridged list of of papers that we and our colleagues have published, based on work in the US and Denmark, and including students in secondary schools and universities.

“Gender-related Science Anxiety: A First Binational Study,” J. V. Mallow, Journal of Science Education and Technology 3, 227 (1994).

“Students’ Confidence and Teachers’ Styles: A Binational Comparison,” J. V. Mallow, Am. J. Physics 63, 1007-1011 (1995).

“Student Attitudes and Enrolments in Physics, with Emphasis on Gender, Nationality, and Science Anxiety,” J. V. Mallow. In Jensen, J. H., Niss, M., and Wedege, T. (Eds.) Justification and EnrolmentProblems in Education Involving Mathematics or Physics, Roskilde U. Press, Roskilde, DK, 237-258 (1998).

“Does Physics Teaching Affect Gender-based Science Anxiety?” M. K. Udo, G. P. Ramsey, S. Reynolds-Alpert, and J. V. Mallow, Journal of Science Education and Technology 10, 237-247 (2001).

“Science Anxiety and Gender in Students taking General Education Science Courses” M. K. Udo, G. P. Ramsey, and J. V. Mallow, J. Sci. Educ. and Technol. 13, 435-446 (2004).

“Gender, Science Anxiety, and Constructivism [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_(philosophy_of_education)]: a Binational Study,” J. V. Mallow and H. Kastrup, Proceedings LMFK, Akureyri, Iceland (2005)

“Science Anxiety: Research and Action.” J. V. Mallow. In Mintzes , J. J. and Leonard, W. H. (Eds.) Handbook of College Science Teaching, NSTA Press, Arlington, VA, 3-14 (2006).

“Science Anxiety, Science Attitudes, and Gender: Interviews from a Binational Study,” J. Mallow, H. Kastrup, F. Bryant, N. Hislop, R.Shefner, and M. Udo, J. Sci. Educ. and Technol. 19, 356 - 369 (2010).

“Gender, Science Anxiety, and Science Attitudes: A Multinational Perspective,” Proceedings of the Expert Group Meeting: Gender, Science and Technology, UN Division for the Advancement of Women & UNESCO, Paris (2010). http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/egm/gst_2010/Mallow-EP.5-EGM-ST.pdf

“Science Anxiety, Science Attitudes, and Constructivism: A Binational Study,” F. Bryant, H. Kastrup, M. Udo, N. Hislop, R. Shefner, and J. Mallow, Journal of Science Education and Technology 22, 432-448 (2013).

“Gender Roles in Science,”(in Danish) H. Kastrup and J. V. Mallow. In Introduction to Science Studies, ed. M. K. Sillasen (2014).

OUR STUDIES’ QUESTIONNAIRES

We have used two questionnaires: one for anxieties, the other for attitudes. In some cases we studied anxieties alone; in others, we used both and compared them for correlation between attitudes and anxieties. The Science Anxiety Questionnaire was developed by Rosemarie Alvaro as part of her dissertation in the Loyola Applied Psychology Program. It was first used by us in the Science Anxiety Clinic, subsequently on cohorts in the US and Denmark. The Science Attitudes Questionnaire was constructed by Fred Bryant, Loyola Professor of Psychology. It was used in conjunction with the Science Anxiety Questionnaire on cohorts in the US and Denmark.

Here they are.

SCIENCE ANXIETY QUESTIONNAIRE

The items in the questionnaire refer to things and experiences that may cause fear or apprehension. After each item, place a number that describes how much YOU ARE FRIGHTENED BY IT NOWADAYS.

1. Not at all

2. A little

3. A fair amount

4. Much

5. Very much

Learning how to convert Celsius to Fahrenheit degrees as you travel in Canada.
In a Philosophy discussion group, reading a chapter on the Categorical Imperative and being asked to answer questions.
Asking a question in a science class.
Converting kilometers to miles.
Studying for a midterm exam in Chemistry, Physics, or Biology.
Planning a well balanced diet.
Converting American dollars to English pounds as you travel in the British Isles.
Cooling down a hot tub of water to an appropriate temperature for a bath.
Planning the electrical circuit or pathway for a simple “light bulb” experiment.
Replacing a bulb on a movie projector.
Focusing the lens on your camera.
Changing the eyepiece on a microscope.
Using a thermometer in order to record the boiling point of a heating solution.
You want to vote on an upcoming referendum on student activities fees, and you are reading about it so that you might make an informed choice.
Having a fellow student watch you perform an experiment in the lab.
Visiting the Museum of Science and Industry and being asked to explain atomic energy to a 12-year old.
Studying for a final exam in English, History, or Philosophy.
Mixing the proper amount of baking soda and water to put on a bee sting.
Igniting a Coleman stove in preparation for cooking outdoors.
Tuning your guitar to a piano or some other musical instrument.
Filling your bicycle tires with the right amount of air.
Memorizing a chart of historical dates.
In a Physics discussion group, reading a chapter on Quantum Systems and being asked to answer some questions.
Having a fellow student listen to you read in a foreign language.
Reading signs on buildings in a foreign country.
Memorizing the names of elements in the periodic table.
Having your music teacher listen to you as you play an instrument.
Reading the Theater page of Time magazine and having one of your friends ask your opinion on what you have read.
Adding minute quantities of acid to a base solution in order to neutralize it.
Precisely inflating a balloon to be used as apparatus in a Physics experiment.
Lighting a Bunsen burner in the preparation of an experiment.
A vote is coming up on the issue of nuclear power plants, and you are reading background material in order to decide how to vote.
Using a tuning fork in an acoustical experiment.
Mixing boiling water and ice to get water at 70 degrees Fahrenheit.
Studying for a midterm in an History course.
Having your professor watch you perform an experiment in the lab.
Having a teaching assistant watch you perform an experiment in the lab.
Focusing a microscope.
Using a meat thermometer for the first time, and checking the temperature periodically till the meat reaches the desired “doneness.”
Having a teaching assistant watch you draw in Art class.
Reading the Science page of Time magazine and having one of your friends ask your opinion on what you have read.
Studying for a final exam in Chemistry, Physics, or Biology.
Being asked to explain the artistic quality of pop art to a 7th grader on a visit to the Art Museum.
Asking a question in an English Literature class.

SCIENCE ATTITUDES QUESTIONNAIRE

Instructions. Please circle the number that best describes the degree to which you agree or disagree with each item below, using the following scale:

1. Strongly disagree

2. Disagree

3. Neutral

4. Agree

5. Strongly agree

Science reflects the social and political values, philosophical assumptions, and intellectual norms of the culture in which it is practiced.
Science is a “level playing-field” in which men and women have equal status and opportunity.
Tomorrow’s truths in science will be different from those of today.
It is possible for two scientists to carefully perform the same experiment and get very different results, each of which is correct.
Science has nothing to do with my life.
Scientists agree on fundamental subjects like global warming, disposal of nuclear waste, and the use of stem cells.
Science is by its nature hostile to women.
Newton’s laws of motion may eventually be modified.
Scientists’ ideas apply to some physical objects in the universe but not others.
The difference in number of men and women scientists is primarily due to biological differences.
The choice of topics for scientific research is affected by the views of the culture in which scientists work.
There are no such things as objective facts.
Science is boring.
The difference in number of men and women scientists is primarily due to differences in opportunity.
Science is inherently cold and unfriendly.
Science is a conspiracy between governments and scientific agencies formed to keep ordinary people from taking part in the democratic process.
Although interpretations can be ambiguous in things like personal relationships or poetry, in science the facts speak for themselves.
Newer scientific theories build on their predecessors.
Scientific experiments do not really discover “the laws of nature,” but instead let scientists find whatever they expect or want to find.
Women have a harder time succeeding in science than men do.
Modern scientists are responsible for most of the dangers in our world.
Science is a mental representation constructed by the individual.
When it comes to controversial topics such as which foods cause cancer, there’s no way for scientists to evaluate which scientific studies are the best: everything’s just a matter of opinion.
Every scientific theory is eventually proved completely wrong, and must be discarded.
The scientific view of the world is just an agreement among scientists.
Despite what scientists would have us believe, science is actually subjective.
Science transcends national, political, and cultural boundaries.
Scientists don’t understand normal people.
The natural world can best be explained through a combination of perspectives, including science, paranormal phenomena, and astrological horoscopes.
The difference in number of men and women scientists is primarily due to individual choice.
The scientific knowledge in use today may be obsolete tomorrow.
Scientific laws work well in some situations but not in others.
Current ideas about particles that make up the atom will always be maintained as they are.
Objective facts are an illusion.
I cannot fulfill my need for creativity within the closed framework of the natural sciences.
Science is a naturally male field.
Scientific theories are simply agreements among scientists.
Current ideas about particles that make up the atom apply to physical objects everywhere in the universe.
The reason fewer females than males choose careers in science is that women don’t want to be restricted to the narrow scientific way of understanding the world.
The results of scientific research experiments are affected by the views of the culture in which scientists work.

WHAT WE HAVE FOUND

Following are summaries of some our research.

“Gender-related Science Anxiety: A First Binational Study,” J. V. Mallow, Journal of Science Education and Technology 3, 227 (1994).

An investigation was carried out to ascertain whether science anxiety as measured by a self-reporting instrument was related to gender for groups of American and Danish students aged 17 and up. In both national groups, females scored significantly higher on a variety of science anxiety measures than did males. Science anxiety proved to be also related to general anxiety and to field of study, but not significantly to national group, albeit the Danish group as a whole registered somewhat lower than the American group, and in particular, Danish fermales registered lower than American males.

“Does Physics Teaching Affect Gender-based Science Anxiety?” M. K. Udo, G. P. Ramsey, S. Reynolds-Alpert, and J. V. Mallow, Journal of Science Education and Technology 10, 237-247 (2001).

We present the results of a study designed to measure the level of science anxiety in students enrolled in physics courses at Loyola University Chicago. We undertook this study with two objectives: (1) to determine the factors contributing to science anxiety; in particular, to ascertain whether the leading factors identified in an earlier study have remained constant over time, and (2) to investigate whether science anxiety was affected by a semester of introductory physics. This is the first study of its kind, analyzing science anxiety in pre- and posttests of a cohort composed entirely of students taking physics courses. We find that the leading factors contributing to science anxiety are nonscience anxiety, gender, and to a much lesser degree, course of study (major), in agreement with earlier results. In general, males start and end the course with somewhat less science anxiety (and nonscience anxiety) than females. Post-course responses indicated some improvement in nonscience anxiety and in science anxiety for both genders. Acute levels of science anxiety were somewhat decreased by exposure to a physics course. Different pedagogies and gender role models may correlate with anxiety reduction.

Science Anxiety and Gender in Students taking General Education Science Courses” M. K. Udo, G. P. Ramsey, and J. V. Mallow, J. Sci. Educ. and Technol. 13, 435-446 (2004).

Earlier studies of science anxiety in various student cohorts suggested that nonscience majors were highly science anxious (SA), regardless of what science courses they were taking. In these studies, we investigated science anxiety in cohortd consisting mostly of nonscience majors taking general education science courses. Regression analysis shows that the leading predictors of science anxiety are (i) nonscience anxiety and (ii) gender, as they were for different cohorts in the earlier studies. We confirm earlier findings that females are more SA than males. Chi-square analysis of acute science anxiety shows an amplification of these differences. We found statistically significant levels of science anxiety in humanities and social science students of both genders, and gender differences in science anxiety, despite the fact that the students were all enrolled in general education science courses specifically designed for nonscience majors. We found acute levels of anxiety in several groups, especially education, nursing, and business majors.

Students’ attitudes and anxieties about science were measured by responses to two self-report questionnaires. The cohorts were Danish and American students at the upper secondary- and university-levels. Relationships between and among science attitudes, science anxiety, gender, and nationality were examined. Particular attention was paid to constructivist attitudes about science. These fell into at least three broad conceptual categories: Negativity of Science Toward the Individual, Subjective Construction of Knowledge, and Inherent Bias Against Women. Multigroup confirmatory factor analyses revealed that these dimensions of constructivist attitudes were equally applicable and had the same meaning in both cultures. Gender differences in mean levels of constructivist attitudes were found; these varied across the two cultures. Constructivist beliefs were associated with science anxiety, but in different ways for females and males, and for Danes and Americans. In agreement with earlier studies, females in both the US and Danish cohorts were significantly more science anxious than males, and the gender differences for the Americans were larger than those for the Danes.

Our work is what is called “action research”. We don’t just carry out studies, we take action to change attitudes and anxieties: teaching students science skills as well as science anxiety reduction tehcniques, working with educators to recognize anxiety-producing teaching and how to change it, bringing school administrators into the discussion, and more.

Published on May 31, 2025