IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/amerec/v46y2002i2p31-44.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who's Afraid of Their Economics Classes? Why are Students Apprehensive about Introductory Economics Courses? An Empirical Investigation

Author

Listed:
  • Mary Ellen Benedict
  • John Hoag

Abstract

This paper investigates why students are apprehensive about their principles of economics classes. Using data collected on 399 students from a large, midwestem public university in the 1998 academic year, the authors examine whether there are demographic differences in levels of apprehension and what are the reported reasons for apprehension. The study includes a descriptive analysis and a probit analysis and concludes that: (1) course reputation is the main reason reported by students as the reason for being apprehensive; (2) females tend to be more apprehensive than males; and (3) increased math ability reduces apprehension levels for males and females. The authors suggest that preparatory sessions for those students weak in mathematics and alternative teaching methodologies may reduce the level of apprehension in the introductory courses.

Suggested Citation

  • Mary Ellen Benedict & John Hoag, 2002. "Who's Afraid of Their Economics Classes? Why are Students Apprehensive about Introductory Economics Courses? An Empirical Investigation," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 46(2), pages 31-44, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:amerec:v:46:y:2002:i:2:p:31-44
    DOI: 10.1177/056943450204600203
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/056943450204600203
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/056943450204600203?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Carlos J. Asarta & Austin S. Jennings & Paul W. Grimes, 2017. "Economic Education Retrospective," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 62(1), pages 102-117, March.
    2. Susan Pozo & Charles A. Stull, 2006. "Requiring a Math Skills Unit: Results of a Randomized Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 437-441, May.
    3. Leiv Opstad, 2023. "The Relationship Between Norwegian Business Students’ Attitudes Towards Mathematics And Success In Business Education," International Journal of Teaching and Education, European Research Center, vol. 11(1), pages 47-60, December.
    4. Raboy, David G., 2017. "An introductory microeconomics in-class experiment to reinforce the marginal utility/price maximization rule and the integration of modern theory," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 36-49.
    5. George Orlov & Douglas McKee & Irene R. Foster & Daria Bottan & Stephanie R. Thomas, 2021. "Identifying Students at Risk Using a New Math Skills Assessment," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 111, pages 97-101, May.
    6. Gregory M. Randolph, 2016. "Laissez-Colbert," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 61(2), pages 217-228, October.
    7. Ignacio Sarmiento Barbieri & Eric Chiang & José Vázquez, 2024. "Do Human Proctors and Anxiety Affect Exam Scores in Open-book Online Exams? A Field Experiment," Working Papers 320, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    8. Nadia Asandimitra & Achmad Kautsar, 2017. "Financial Self-Efficacy on Women Entrepreneurs Success," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 7(11), pages 293-300, November.
    9. Kim P. Huynh & David T. Jacho-Chávez & James K. Self, 2015. "The Distributional Efficacy of Collaborative Learning on Student Outcomes," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 60(2), pages 98-119, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:amerec:v:46:y:2002:i:2:p:31-44. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://journals.sagepub.com/home/aex .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.