A latent change score analysis of emotion regulation difficulties and evaluative threat in STEM.

We examined implications of evaluative threat on the ability to regulate emotions for first-time college freshmen completing Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) majors (N = 432). Students completed the Evaluative Threat in STEM Scale (Ahlqvist, London, & Rosenthal, 2013) and the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS; Gratz & Roemer, 2004) at six intervals. Cross-sectional and longitudinal measurement invariance was supported. Women reported greater evaluative threat than men, but they did not differ from men in difficulties regulating emotion. Both constructs showed moderate relative stability over time. Using latent change score analyses, significant positive deceleration change patterns indicated that four of the emotion regulation difficulties (Lack of Emotional Awareness, Lack of Emotional Clarity, Impulse Control Difficulties, and Nonacceptance of Emotional Responses) and evaluative threat tended to increase (worsen) over the year, but the increases also slowed (i.e., plateaued) over time. Compared with men, women initially reported higher evaluative threat than men did, but these differences decreased over the year, as women decelerated more quickly than men did. In terms of cross-coupling effects, we found that evaluative threat was associated with subsequent difficulty in identifying strategies to cope with unpleasant emotions. There were no cross-coupling effects for emotion regulation predicting subsequent change in evaluative threat. Gender moderated the Evaluative Threat-to-DERS coupling effects for Lack of Emotional Clarity, Difficulties in Goal-Directed Behavior, and Nonacceptance of Emotional Responses. We discuss implications of evaluative threat for depleting coping resources and some potential psychoeducational and preventive interventions to support students in STEM majors. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Perfectionism and longitudinal patterns of stress for STEM majors: Implications for academic performance.

Complementary hypotheses suggest that perfectionism may (a) cause later stress (stress generation) and (b) moderate the effects of stress on subsequent outcomes (stress enhancement). The present study tested these hypotheses with a sample of 432 first-time college freshmen pursuing science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) majors. Students completed baseline perfectionism scales and repeated measures for perceived academic stress at monthly intervals 3 times in the fall semester and 3 times in the spring semester. Course grade data from institutional records were used to calculate first-year STEM grade point average (GPA) as the distal outcome in analyses. Gender, high school GPA, SAT math scores, and university were covariates. Latent profile analyses supported adaptive, maladaptive, and nonperfectionist classes and latent class growth mixture models identified distinctly low, moderate, and high patterns of academic stress over the year. Latent transition analyses indicated that maladaptive perfectionists were likely to experience moderate or high stress (none transitioned to low stress), and adaptive perfectionists were likely to have low or moderate stress (only 4% transitioned to high stress). Women were substantially more likely than male maladaptive perfectionists to experience high stress. Low-stressed adaptive perfectionists followed by moderately stressed maladaptive perfectionists had relatively higher GPAs than other groups. Subgroups of perfectionists who transitioned to the next higher stress level had substantially lower GPAs than other groups. Overall, results were consistent with stress-generation and stress-enhancement hypotheses regarding perfectionists. Findings suggested implications for prevention and intervention with perfectionistic STEM students that should be implemented early in their college experience.