- Email: [email protected]
Comparing the Level of Anxiety in Male & Female School Students
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 84 (2013) 41 – 46
3rd World Conference on Psychology, Counselling and Guidance (WCPCG-2012)
Comparing The Level Of Anxiety In Male & Female School Students Leili Hosseinia**, Homayoun Khazalib a Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch of Tehran, Iran, College of Biological Sciences,, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
b
Abstract This study aims at comparing the level of anxiety in male and female students at Tehran elementary schools. To this end, 1200 students (600 girls and 600 boys) at middle schools were selected using the random cluster sampling method and tested with Reynolds & Richmond's Anxiety Scale (RCMAS). Screening of students using the lie-detector subscale led to a fall in the number of valid subjects for data analysis. Results of data analysis suggested that female students scored higher in the subscales of physiological anxiety and worry than male students, implying that the girls' level of anxiety is higher in these subscales and there is a significant difference in the 95-percent level of confidence between girls and boys. In the same way, in the subscale of concentration, no significant difference was observed between girls and boys. Still, based on the overall score of anxiety, a significant difference was observed between girls and boys. © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection peer-review responsibility of Prof. Dr. and Huseyin Uzunboylu Dr. Mukaddes Demirok, Nearof EastDr. University, Cyprus © 2013and Published byunder Elsevier Ltd. Selection peer review&under the responsibility Melehat Halat
Keywords: Anxiety, Reynolds and Richmond's Scale, Student
1. Introduction Everyone feels anxious at times. Challenges such as workplace pressures, public speaking, highly demanding schedules or writing an exam can lead to a sense of worry, even fear. These sensations, however uncomfortable, are different from the ones associated with an anxiety disorder. People suffering from an anxiety disorder are subject to intense, prolonged feelings of fright and distress for no obvious reason. The condition turns their life into a continuous journey of unease and fear and can interfere with their relationships with family, friends and colleagues. Research on anxiety is one of the most active areas in psychology, and it has been the focus of considerable study especially in the last two decades (Abdel-Khalek & et al 2004) Anxiety disorders are the most common of all mental health problems. It is estimated that they affect approximately 1 in 10 people. They are more prevalent among women than among men, and they affect children as well as adults. According the German Health and Interview and Examination survey indicated that the woman at least twice as likely as men to be diagnosed with an anxiety
*
Corresponding author : Leili Hosseini [email protected]
1877-0428 © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and peer-review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Huseyin Uzunboylu & Dr. Mukaddes Demirok, Near East University, Cyprus doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.506
42
Leili Hosseini and Homayoun Khazali / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 84 (2013) 41 – 46
disorder (de Graaf et, 2002) the gender disparity is particularly evident for agoraphobia. Among people exposed to a trauma, women are twice as likely to develop PTST as are men (Breslau et a., 1999). Ocd is the only anxiety disorder that is equally common in women and men(Kring & et al 2010). Anxiety symptoms and disorders are the number one health problem, ranging from a simple Adjustment Disorder to more difficult and debilitating disorders such as Panic Disorder and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. According to the most recent data, the lifetime prevalence for anxiety disorders as a whole in adults is about 25%; the frequency in children is unknown, but felt to be significantly underreported and under-diagnosed. More specifically Social Anxiety Disorder has a lifetime risk of 12%, while Panic Disorder occurs in approximately 1.7-3% of the adult population (Jacob, 2004). Although quite common, Anxiety Disorders in children often are overlooked or misjudged, despite them being very treatable conditions with good, persistent medical care. What does seem to be developing in the medical ic disorders likely have their first (although perhaps subtle or ignored) manifestations in childhood and that if left untreated these anxiety disorders in children likely progress to adult. The aim of the current investigation was to explore sex-related differences in anxiety in childhood in Iranian sample of students (10 to 13 years old). 2. Material and Method 2.1 Participants: This study adopts the correlation method. Research population comprises all students at Tehran middle schools from among whom 1200 individuals (600 girls and 600 boys) were randomly selected and tested. 2.2 Instruments Reynolds & Richmond's Test (1978): This scale has been constructed by Reynolds and Richmond for assessing and diagnosing symptoms of general anxiety in 6- to 19-year-old children and teenagers and is made up of four subscales, namely physiological anxiety, worry/sensitivity, social concern/concentration, and lie-detector. This scale is of the close-ended tests type with yes/no questions. Score 1 is for yes and score 0 is for no answers. Thus, scores of anxiety in this scale can fluctuate between 0 to 28. In this scale, the more number of yes answers, the more level of anxiety in a subject. Factor analysis studies of RCMAS (Reynolds & Puget, 1981) identify three major factors: physiological anxiety, worry and oversensitivity, and concentration. The feature of this test is the lie-detector scale. This scale comprises 37 items 28 of which relate to the triple indices of anxiety and the remaining 9 items constitute a lie-detector subscale. Reynolds and Richmond (1985) have reported the internal stability of its triple subscales to be from 0.65 to 0.80, and internal stability of the entire scale to be 0.8. Ostovar and Razavieh (2002) also verified the four-factor structure of this scale on a sample of Iranian adolescents and, applying a re - test method with a oneto four-week interval, reported reliability of this scale to be 0.89. The degree of internal homogeneity of this scale for the subscales of physiological anxiety, worry, and concentration has reported to be 0.65, 0.64, and 0.60 respectively using Coder Richardson's method. Reynolds and Richmond (1985) reported the internal stability of its three subscales to range from 0.65 to 0.80 and the internal stability of the whole scale to be 0.8. Ostovar and Razavieh (2002) verified the four-factor structure of this scale on a sample of Iranian adolescents and reported the reliability of the scale to be 0.89 using the re-test method with a one- to four-week interval. The degree of internal homogeneity of this scale for the subscales of physiological anxiety, worry, and concentration has reported to be 0.65, 0.64, and 0.60 respectively using Coder Richardson's method. Reliability Analysis of the Iranian RCMAS is reported in Table 1:
43
Leili Hosseini and Homayoun Khazali / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 84 (2013) 41 – 46 Table 1: Reliability Analysis of the Iranian RCMAS M SD Total Score
18.53
6.08
0.87
Male
18.03
6.14
0.84
Female
18.74
6.03
0.82
Physiological Anxiety
4.29
2.46
0.73
Worry/Oversensitivity
5.67
3.26
0.84
Concentration
2.86
2.38
0.69
3. Results In this part, descriptive information concerning the research sample is presented. In the table below, descriptive indices of the major researcher variable are displayed in general, and by the academic grade and gender: Table 2: Central indices and dispersion of subjects' scores by academic grade and gender in Reynolds and Richmond Anxiety Scale (RCMAS) Standard Size Mean Skewness Quortesis Min. Max Deviation st 1 Grade 92 14.0652 8.76407 -0.25 -1.15 0.00 28.00 2nd
124
19.8710
4.69383
-0.29
-0.69
9.00
27.00
3rd 4th 5th Total Male Female
146 126 142 630 286 344
19.3973 19.0159 18.9296 18.5302 18.11 18.87
5.14008 4.96546 5.60477 6.08118 6.798 5.398
-0.51 -0.15 -0.47 -0.8 -0.85 -0.59
-0.17 -0.82 -0.4 0.55 0.37 0.14
6.00 7.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
28.00 27.00 28.00 28.00 28.00 28.00
630
18.53
6.081
-0.8
0.55
0.00
28.00
Total
Gender Total anxiety score
As seen, the number of subjects reached 630 upon omission of the subjects who scored higher than 4 in the liedetector scale. Moreover, given the table above, mean and standard deviation of the total anxiety score were respectively 18.53 and 6.08. In the same way in this table, descriptive indices of subjects' anxiety are presented by gender and academic grade. As observed, mean and standard deviation of girls' anxiety were 18.11 and 6.79 respectively, and those of male students were respectively 18.87 and 5.39. In order to test the hypothesis proposing that the level of anxiety in male and female students in RCMAS is significantly different, the independent student t test was administered, the results of which are presented below: Table 3: Summarized independent t test for comparing male and female students' level of anxiety Gender Size t df P value 286 -2.779 628 0.005 Male 344 Female
As indicated by the data performed differently in RCMAS in comparison to the boys. Moreover, in order to test the difference in level of anxiety in girls and boys in RCMAS subscales, the repeated measure design one between one within was used, the results of which are displayed in the table below: Table 4: Repeated design results
Intercept
SS
Degr. of
MS
F
p
61415.03
1
61415.03
40232.81
0.000
44
Leili Hosseini and Homayoun Khazali / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 84 (2013) 41 – 46
Gender
15.60
1
15.60
10.22
0.001
Error
1009.01
628
1.62
R1
544.56
2
272.28
168.43
0.000
R1*Gender
2.55
2
1.28
1.60
0.172
As reported in the table above, given the total anxiety score, the difference between male and female students is significant. Likewise, the result of the repeated design analysis suggests that the interactive effect of gender and the test subscales at the 99% level of confidence is significant. This implies that girls are more anxious than boys in some subscales, and boys have experienced more anxiety in some other ones. This issue is well reflected in the following figure: Vertical bars denote 0.95 confidence inter 5.2 5.0 4.8
Mean
4.6 4.4 4.2 4.0 3.8
concentration
Physiological
3.4
Worry
3.6
Anxiety
male Female
Figure 1: Comparing girls and boys in RCMAS subscales
According to the results in the table above, it is obvious that female students scored higher than male students in the subscales of worry and physiological anxiety, suggesting that the girls' level of anxiety is higher in these subscales and there is significant difference between girls and boys at the 95% level of confidence. On the contrary, no significant difference was observed between girls and boys in the subscale of concentration. 4. Discussion and Conclusion The main objective of the current series of investigations was fulfilled. Significant relationships were found between anxiety and gender. Females scored higher than males on the common set of anxiety items. Females obtain higher score than males on self-report measures of anxiety. This finding is consistent with previous results(see e.g Feingold, 1994; Gater ,Tansella, Korten, Tiemens, Mavreas & Olatawura, 1998; Mackinaw-Koons & Vasey, 2000;
Leili Hosseini and Homayoun Khazali / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 84 (2013) 41 – 46
45
Pigott 1999, Scheibe & Albus,1992) Female preponderance of anxiety has been a consistent finding whether in children. There are many different theories about why females are more likely to develop anxiety disorder than male are. Women may be more likely to report their symptoms. Psychological differences also might help explain these gender gaps. For example, men may be rise to believe more in their personal control over the situation, a variable protective against anxiety disorders. Social factors like gender roles are also likely to play a role. Men may experience more social pressure than women to face fears (facing fears is one of the most effective treatment)(Davison & et al 2010).women facing different life circumstance than men. For example, women are much more likely than men to be sexually assaulted during childhood and adulthood (Tolin & Foa, 2006). Having show more biological stress reactivity than do men (Olff et al. 2007), Perhaps as a result of cultural and psychological influences. We could summerize Different theories to elucidate the development of sex role behavior among social learning theory (Modeling and imitation), Cognitive developmental theory, and the gender schema theory (Jacklin . 1989). In the same way environmental stress has been reported as relevant to the development and exacerbation of anxiety (Barlow 1988).as well as conflict-affected family environment (Silverman & Nelles 1990). Social desirability (Hagborg, 1991). In Iran both child-rearing practice and tradition have an impact. There is a growing conflict between the traditional female role of getting married and bearing children and the new endeavors of gaining education and working outside the home ( Subaie & Alhamad 2000). Tradition maintains a hierarchical order in the family in which dominance of male over female and older over younger is observed (Fakhr-E-Islam 2000). However, Lewinsohn & et al. (1998) Concluded female vulnerability to anxiety is associated with some type of genetic rather than purely environmentally determined. By the same token, Seeman (1997) basing her conclusion on the examination of the female hormones: the cyclical fluctuations of estrogens and progesterone enhance the response to stress, which confers susceptibility to depression and anxiety. In the present research opinion the anxiety score of any given person is the product of both biological and psychological factors and their interaction. References Abdel-Khalek, A. M. (2004). Divergent, criterion-related, and discriminant validities for the Kuwait University Anxiety Scale. Psychological Reports, 94, 572-576. Al-Subaie, A., & Alhamad, A. (2000). Psychiatry in Saudi-Arabia. In I. Al-Issa (Ed.), Al-Junun: Mental illness in the Islamic world (pp. 205233). Madison: International Universities Press. Barlow, D. (1988). Anxiety and its disorders: The nature and treatment of anxiety and panic. NewYork: Guildford Press. Fakhr El-Islam, M. (2000). Mental illness in Kuwait and Qatar. In I. Al-Issa (Ed.), Al-Junun: Mental Illness in the Islamic world (pp. 121-137). Madison: International Universities Press. . Educational and Psychological Measurement, 51, 423-427. Jacklin, C. N. (1989). Female and male: Issues of gender. American Psychologist, 44, 127-133. Ostovar, S., & Razaviyeh, A. (2002). Validity and reliability of the revised children's manifest anxiety scale. (Unpublished research, Research Council of Fars Province). (Persian). Ostovar, S., & Razaviyeh, A. (2003). Psychometrics characteristics of social anxiety scale for adolescents (SAS -A). Paper presented at the Fifth ene. University of Medical Sciences and Health Service of Zanjan. (Persian). Pigott, T. A. (1999). Gender differences in the epidemiology and treatment of anxiety disorders. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 60 (Suppl. 18), 415. Reynolds, C. R. (1980). Concurrent validity of What I Think and Feel: The Revised Children s Manifest Anxiety Scale. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 48, 774-775. Reynolds, C. R. (1981). Long-term stability of scores on the revised children s manifest anxiety scale. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 53 (3), 702. Reynolds, C. R., & Gutkin, T. (1982). The handbook of school Psychology. New York: Wiley. Reynolds, C. R., & Paget, K. D. (1981). Factor analysis of the revised children s manifest anxiety scale for blacks, whites, males, and females with a national and innovative sample. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49 (3), 352-359. Reynolds, C. R., & Paget, K. D. (1982). National normative and reliability data for the revised children s manifest anxiety scale. Paper Presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of School Psychologists, Toronto.
46
Leili Hosseini and Homayoun Khazali / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 84 (2013) 41 – 46
Reynolds, C. R., & Richmond, B. O. (1978). What I Think and Feel: A revised measure of Children s Manifest anxiety. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 6 (2), 271-280. Reynolds, W. M. (1984). Depression in children and adolescents. Phenomenology evaluation and treatment. School Psychology Review, 13 (1), 171-182. Scheibe, G., & Albus, M. (1992). Age at onset, precipitating events, sex distribution, and cooccurrence of anxiety disorders. Psychopathology, 25, 11-18.a Seeman, M. V. (1997). Psychopathology in women and men: Focus on female hormones. AmericanJournal of Psychiatry, 154, 1641-1647. Silverman, W. K., & Nelles, W B. (1988). The Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule for Children.Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 27, 772-778
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 84 (2013) 41 – 46
3rd World Conference on Psychology, Counselling and Guidance (WCPCG-2012)
Comparing The Level Of Anxiety In Male & Female School Students Leili Hosseinia**, Homayoun Khazalib a Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch of Tehran, Iran, College of Biological Sciences,, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
b
Abstract This study aims at comparing the level of anxiety in male and female students at Tehran elementary schools. To this end, 1200 students (600 girls and 600 boys) at middle schools were selected using the random cluster sampling method and tested with Reynolds & Richmond's Anxiety Scale (RCMAS). Screening of students using the lie-detector subscale led to a fall in the number of valid subjects for data analysis. Results of data analysis suggested that female students scored higher in the subscales of physiological anxiety and worry than male students, implying that the girls' level of anxiety is higher in these subscales and there is a significant difference in the 95-percent level of confidence between girls and boys. In the same way, in the subscale of concentration, no significant difference was observed between girls and boys. Still, based on the overall score of anxiety, a significant difference was observed between girls and boys. © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection peer-review responsibility of Prof. Dr. and Huseyin Uzunboylu Dr. Mukaddes Demirok, Nearof EastDr. University, Cyprus © 2013and Published byunder Elsevier Ltd. Selection peer review&under the responsibility Melehat Halat
Keywords: Anxiety, Reynolds and Richmond's Scale, Student
1. Introduction Everyone feels anxious at times. Challenges such as workplace pressures, public speaking, highly demanding schedules or writing an exam can lead to a sense of worry, even fear. These sensations, however uncomfortable, are different from the ones associated with an anxiety disorder. People suffering from an anxiety disorder are subject to intense, prolonged feelings of fright and distress for no obvious reason. The condition turns their life into a continuous journey of unease and fear and can interfere with their relationships with family, friends and colleagues. Research on anxiety is one of the most active areas in psychology, and it has been the focus of considerable study especially in the last two decades (Abdel-Khalek & et al 2004) Anxiety disorders are the most common of all mental health problems. It is estimated that they affect approximately 1 in 10 people. They are more prevalent among women than among men, and they affect children as well as adults. According the German Health and Interview and Examination survey indicated that the woman at least twice as likely as men to be diagnosed with an anxiety
*
Corresponding author : Leili Hosseini [email protected]
1877-0428 © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and peer-review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Huseyin Uzunboylu & Dr. Mukaddes Demirok, Near East University, Cyprus doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.506
42
Leili Hosseini and Homayoun Khazali / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 84 (2013) 41 – 46
disorder (de Graaf et, 2002) the gender disparity is particularly evident for agoraphobia. Among people exposed to a trauma, women are twice as likely to develop PTST as are men (Breslau et a., 1999). Ocd is the only anxiety disorder that is equally common in women and men(Kring & et al 2010). Anxiety symptoms and disorders are the number one health problem, ranging from a simple Adjustment Disorder to more difficult and debilitating disorders such as Panic Disorder and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. According to the most recent data, the lifetime prevalence for anxiety disorders as a whole in adults is about 25%; the frequency in children is unknown, but felt to be significantly underreported and under-diagnosed. More specifically Social Anxiety Disorder has a lifetime risk of 12%, while Panic Disorder occurs in approximately 1.7-3% of the adult population (Jacob, 2004). Although quite common, Anxiety Disorders in children often are overlooked or misjudged, despite them being very treatable conditions with good, persistent medical care. What does seem to be developing in the medical ic disorders likely have their first (although perhaps subtle or ignored) manifestations in childhood and that if left untreated these anxiety disorders in children likely progress to adult. The aim of the current investigation was to explore sex-related differences in anxiety in childhood in Iranian sample of students (10 to 13 years old). 2. Material and Method 2.1 Participants: This study adopts the correlation method. Research population comprises all students at Tehran middle schools from among whom 1200 individuals (600 girls and 600 boys) were randomly selected and tested. 2.2 Instruments Reynolds & Richmond's Test (1978): This scale has been constructed by Reynolds and Richmond for assessing and diagnosing symptoms of general anxiety in 6- to 19-year-old children and teenagers and is made up of four subscales, namely physiological anxiety, worry/sensitivity, social concern/concentration, and lie-detector. This scale is of the close-ended tests type with yes/no questions. Score 1 is for yes and score 0 is for no answers. Thus, scores of anxiety in this scale can fluctuate between 0 to 28. In this scale, the more number of yes answers, the more level of anxiety in a subject. Factor analysis studies of RCMAS (Reynolds & Puget, 1981) identify three major factors: physiological anxiety, worry and oversensitivity, and concentration. The feature of this test is the lie-detector scale. This scale comprises 37 items 28 of which relate to the triple indices of anxiety and the remaining 9 items constitute a lie-detector subscale. Reynolds and Richmond (1985) have reported the internal stability of its triple subscales to be from 0.65 to 0.80, and internal stability of the entire scale to be 0.8. Ostovar and Razavieh (2002) also verified the four-factor structure of this scale on a sample of Iranian adolescents and, applying a re - test method with a oneto four-week interval, reported reliability of this scale to be 0.89. The degree of internal homogeneity of this scale for the subscales of physiological anxiety, worry, and concentration has reported to be 0.65, 0.64, and 0.60 respectively using Coder Richardson's method. Reynolds and Richmond (1985) reported the internal stability of its three subscales to range from 0.65 to 0.80 and the internal stability of the whole scale to be 0.8. Ostovar and Razavieh (2002) verified the four-factor structure of this scale on a sample of Iranian adolescents and reported the reliability of the scale to be 0.89 using the re-test method with a one- to four-week interval. The degree of internal homogeneity of this scale for the subscales of physiological anxiety, worry, and concentration has reported to be 0.65, 0.64, and 0.60 respectively using Coder Richardson's method. Reliability Analysis of the Iranian RCMAS is reported in Table 1:
43
Leili Hosseini and Homayoun Khazali / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 84 (2013) 41 – 46 Table 1: Reliability Analysis of the Iranian RCMAS M SD Total Score
18.53
6.08
0.87
Male
18.03
6.14
0.84
Female
18.74
6.03
0.82
Physiological Anxiety
4.29
2.46
0.73
Worry/Oversensitivity
5.67
3.26
0.84
Concentration
2.86
2.38
0.69
3. Results In this part, descriptive information concerning the research sample is presented. In the table below, descriptive indices of the major researcher variable are displayed in general, and by the academic grade and gender: Table 2: Central indices and dispersion of subjects' scores by academic grade and gender in Reynolds and Richmond Anxiety Scale (RCMAS) Standard Size Mean Skewness Quortesis Min. Max Deviation st 1 Grade 92 14.0652 8.76407 -0.25 -1.15 0.00 28.00 2nd
124
19.8710
4.69383
-0.29
-0.69
9.00
27.00
3rd 4th 5th Total Male Female
146 126 142 630 286 344
19.3973 19.0159 18.9296 18.5302 18.11 18.87
5.14008 4.96546 5.60477 6.08118 6.798 5.398
-0.51 -0.15 -0.47 -0.8 -0.85 -0.59
-0.17 -0.82 -0.4 0.55 0.37 0.14
6.00 7.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
28.00 27.00 28.00 28.00 28.00 28.00
630
18.53
6.081
-0.8
0.55
0.00
28.00
Total
Gender Total anxiety score
As seen, the number of subjects reached 630 upon omission of the subjects who scored higher than 4 in the liedetector scale. Moreover, given the table above, mean and standard deviation of the total anxiety score were respectively 18.53 and 6.08. In the same way in this table, descriptive indices of subjects' anxiety are presented by gender and academic grade. As observed, mean and standard deviation of girls' anxiety were 18.11 and 6.79 respectively, and those of male students were respectively 18.87 and 5.39. In order to test the hypothesis proposing that the level of anxiety in male and female students in RCMAS is significantly different, the independent student t test was administered, the results of which are presented below: Table 3: Summarized independent t test for comparing male and female students' level of anxiety Gender Size t df P value 286 -2.779 628 0.005 Male 344 Female
As indicated by the data performed differently in RCMAS in comparison to the boys. Moreover, in order to test the difference in level of anxiety in girls and boys in RCMAS subscales, the repeated measure design one between one within was used, the results of which are displayed in the table below: Table 4: Repeated design results
Intercept
SS
Degr. of
MS
F
p
61415.03
1
61415.03
40232.81
0.000
44
Leili Hosseini and Homayoun Khazali / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 84 (2013) 41 – 46
Gender
15.60
1
15.60
10.22
0.001
Error
1009.01
628
1.62
R1
544.56
2
272.28
168.43
0.000
R1*Gender
2.55
2
1.28
1.60
0.172
As reported in the table above, given the total anxiety score, the difference between male and female students is significant. Likewise, the result of the repeated design analysis suggests that the interactive effect of gender and the test subscales at the 99% level of confidence is significant. This implies that girls are more anxious than boys in some subscales, and boys have experienced more anxiety in some other ones. This issue is well reflected in the following figure: Vertical bars denote 0.95 confidence inter 5.2 5.0 4.8
Mean
4.6 4.4 4.2 4.0 3.8
concentration
Physiological
3.4
Worry
3.6
Anxiety
male Female
Figure 1: Comparing girls and boys in RCMAS subscales
According to the results in the table above, it is obvious that female students scored higher than male students in the subscales of worry and physiological anxiety, suggesting that the girls' level of anxiety is higher in these subscales and there is significant difference between girls and boys at the 95% level of confidence. On the contrary, no significant difference was observed between girls and boys in the subscale of concentration. 4. Discussion and Conclusion The main objective of the current series of investigations was fulfilled. Significant relationships were found between anxiety and gender. Females scored higher than males on the common set of anxiety items. Females obtain higher score than males on self-report measures of anxiety. This finding is consistent with previous results(see e.g Feingold, 1994; Gater ,Tansella, Korten, Tiemens, Mavreas & Olatawura, 1998; Mackinaw-Koons & Vasey, 2000;
Leili Hosseini and Homayoun Khazali / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 84 (2013) 41 – 46
45
Pigott 1999, Scheibe & Albus,1992) Female preponderance of anxiety has been a consistent finding whether in children. There are many different theories about why females are more likely to develop anxiety disorder than male are. Women may be more likely to report their symptoms. Psychological differences also might help explain these gender gaps. For example, men may be rise to believe more in their personal control over the situation, a variable protective against anxiety disorders. Social factors like gender roles are also likely to play a role. Men may experience more social pressure than women to face fears (facing fears is one of the most effective treatment)(Davison & et al 2010).women facing different life circumstance than men. For example, women are much more likely than men to be sexually assaulted during childhood and adulthood (Tolin & Foa, 2006). Having show more biological stress reactivity than do men (Olff et al. 2007), Perhaps as a result of cultural and psychological influences. We could summerize Different theories to elucidate the development of sex role behavior among social learning theory (Modeling and imitation), Cognitive developmental theory, and the gender schema theory (Jacklin . 1989). In the same way environmental stress has been reported as relevant to the development and exacerbation of anxiety (Barlow 1988).as well as conflict-affected family environment (Silverman & Nelles 1990). Social desirability (Hagborg, 1991). In Iran both child-rearing practice and tradition have an impact. There is a growing conflict between the traditional female role of getting married and bearing children and the new endeavors of gaining education and working outside the home ( Subaie & Alhamad 2000). Tradition maintains a hierarchical order in the family in which dominance of male over female and older over younger is observed (Fakhr-E-Islam 2000). However, Lewinsohn & et al. (1998) Concluded female vulnerability to anxiety is associated with some type of genetic rather than purely environmentally determined. By the same token, Seeman (1997) basing her conclusion on the examination of the female hormones: the cyclical fluctuations of estrogens and progesterone enhance the response to stress, which confers susceptibility to depression and anxiety. In the present research opinion the anxiety score of any given person is the product of both biological and psychological factors and their interaction. References Abdel-Khalek, A. M. (2004). Divergent, criterion-related, and discriminant validities for the Kuwait University Anxiety Scale. Psychological Reports, 94, 572-576. Al-Subaie, A., & Alhamad, A. (2000). Psychiatry in Saudi-Arabia. In I. Al-Issa (Ed.), Al-Junun: Mental illness in the Islamic world (pp. 205233). Madison: International Universities Press. Barlow, D. (1988). Anxiety and its disorders: The nature and treatment of anxiety and panic. NewYork: Guildford Press. Fakhr El-Islam, M. (2000). Mental illness in Kuwait and Qatar. In I. Al-Issa (Ed.), Al-Junun: Mental Illness in the Islamic world (pp. 121-137). Madison: International Universities Press. . Educational and Psychological Measurement, 51, 423-427. Jacklin, C. N. (1989). Female and male: Issues of gender. American Psychologist, 44, 127-133. Ostovar, S., & Razaviyeh, A. (2002). Validity and reliability of the revised children's manifest anxiety scale. (Unpublished research, Research Council of Fars Province). (Persian). Ostovar, S., & Razaviyeh, A. (2003). Psychometrics characteristics of social anxiety scale for adolescents (SAS -A). Paper presented at the Fifth ene. University of Medical Sciences and Health Service of Zanjan. (Persian). Pigott, T. A. (1999). Gender differences in the epidemiology and treatment of anxiety disorders. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 60 (Suppl. 18), 415. Reynolds, C. R. (1980). Concurrent validity of What I Think and Feel: The Revised Children s Manifest Anxiety Scale. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 48, 774-775. Reynolds, C. R. (1981). Long-term stability of scores on the revised children s manifest anxiety scale. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 53 (3), 702. Reynolds, C. R., & Gutkin, T. (1982). The handbook of school Psychology. New York: Wiley. Reynolds, C. R., & Paget, K. D. (1981). Factor analysis of the revised children s manifest anxiety scale for blacks, whites, males, and females with a national and innovative sample. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49 (3), 352-359. Reynolds, C. R., & Paget, K. D. (1982). National normative and reliability data for the revised children s manifest anxiety scale. Paper Presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of School Psychologists, Toronto.
46
Leili Hosseini and Homayoun Khazali / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 84 (2013) 41 – 46
Reynolds, C. R., & Richmond, B. O. (1978). What I Think and Feel: A revised measure of Children s Manifest anxiety. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 6 (2), 271-280. Reynolds, W. M. (1984). Depression in children and adolescents. Phenomenology evaluation and treatment. School Psychology Review, 13 (1), 171-182. Scheibe, G., & Albus, M. (1992). Age at onset, precipitating events, sex distribution, and cooccurrence of anxiety disorders. Psychopathology, 25, 11-18.a Seeman, M. V. (1997). Psychopathology in women and men: Focus on female hormones. AmericanJournal of Psychiatry, 154, 1641-1647. Silverman, W. K., & Nelles, W B. (1988). The Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule for Children.Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 27, 772-778