Math anxiety significantly impacts students' well-being and academic performance. It's hypothesized to affect performance through two mechanisms: distraction from intrusive anxious thoughts, and a failure to develop effective study techniques. This study compares two classroom interventions designed to address these mechanisms: an Emotion Regulation (ER) intervention using cognitive reappraisal to manage anxious thoughts, and a Study Skills (SS) intervention promoting effective study habits like self-testing. The ER intervention aims to downregulate anxious responses to mathematics, while the SS intervention aims to improve learning and overcome avoidance behaviors. Both interventions were designed to be easily and cost-effectively implemented in a classroom setting. The study's primary research questions were: 1) Do either intervention group show increased grade performance in the second semester relative to the first? and 2) Is one intervention more effective than the other in reducing the negative impact of math anxiety on grade performance? Additional questions explored the duration of intervention effects and the role of other anxiety sources.

Prior research indicates math anxiety negatively correlates with performance due to intrusive thoughts consuming working memory. Interventions focusing on emotion regulation, particularly cognitive reappraisal, have shown promise in reducing negative affect and improving performance, but often in lab settings. Other research highlights the efficacy of improving study skills, including self-testing and spaced repetition, in enhancing learning and reducing anxiety. These techniques have demonstrated positive effects in both controlled settings and real-world classrooms. While intensive tutoring has shown success, it's not scalable. This study aimed to test accessible interventions in a real-world classroom setting.

The study involved 224 high school students from two schools, pseudo-randomly assigned to either the ER or SS intervention group. Data included student demographics, pre-intervention grades (average of quarters 1 and 2), and grades during the intervention (quarters 3 and 4). Several standardized anxiety measures were also administered, including the Math Anxiety Rating Scale (MARS), Academic Anxiety Inventory (AAI), State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), and Test Anxiety Inventory (TAI). The interventions, introduced at the beginning of the second semester, involved 20-30 minute small-group discussions focusing on practical application of the intervention strategies. Students also completed pre-test writing activities: the ER group wrote about feelings, the SS group wrote about expected test problems. Follow-up surveys gauged intervention strategy implementation throughout the second semester. Linear mixed models (LMMs) were used for primary analyses, controlling for course subject, teacher, and previous math performance. Pre-/post-intervention grade differences were also analyzed using linear models.

Prior to the intervention, math anxiety significantly predicted lower pre-intervention grades, but there were no significant differences between the groups. During the second semester, increased math anxiety was associated with decreased grade performance, but a significant interaction emerged between math anxiety and intervention group. The SS intervention ameliorated the negative impact of math anxiety on grades; highly anxious students in the SS group performed significantly better than those in the ER group. This effect was approximately half a letter grade higher. For students lower in math anxiety, the ER intervention showed a slight positive effect. This pattern persisted across both quarters 3 and 4, indicating lasting benefits of the SS intervention. Analysis of pre-/post-intervention grade differences reinforced these findings, showing that highly anxious students in the SS group maintained or improved grades, while those in the ER group experienced grade decreases. Analyses controlling for other anxiety sources (trait, test) showed no interactions with intervention group or math anxiety, suggesting a relatively specific effect. While there was a gender effect on overall grades (females higher), no interactions with intervention group or math anxiety were observed.

The study's findings support the hypothesis that improving study skills is a more effective strategy for mitigating the negative effects of math anxiety on performance, particularly for highly anxious students. The SS intervention, focusing on self-testing and spaced repetition, enabled these students to actively engage with math material, overcoming avoidance and habituating to anxiety. The ER intervention's limited effect might be due to the cognitive demands of reappraisal, which might overwhelm students already experiencing high anxiety. The pre-test writing activity, while intended for emotion regulation, could have also provided a benefit to the SS group, potentially reducing anxiety through enhanced memory recall. The results suggest a reciprocal relationship between anxiety and achievement, with improved study skills potentially fostering both better understanding and reduced anxiety.

This study demonstrates the significant potential of a study skills intervention in improving math grades for students with high math anxiety. The ease of implementation and lasting effects of this intervention offer valuable implications for educators seeking to support students' mathematical success. Future research could explore combined interventions targeting both study skills and emotion regulation, examine the longitudinal reciprocal effects between math achievement and anxiety, and include a no-contact control group.

The study's real-world setting introduced variability in educational environments and assessment measures across schools, potentially weakening observed effects. The lack of a no-intervention control group limits causal inferences, though within-subject comparisons across semesters mitigate this to some extent. Future research should include a control group to further strengthen conclusions.