Brenda R. J. Jansen

The Abbreviated Math Anxiety Scale (AMAS) is commonly used to compare groups on math anxiety. Group comparisons should however be preceded by a demonstration of metric and scalar measurement invariance, which is currently only available for undergraduate students in the USA. This study tested for metric and scalar measurement invariance of AMAS scores across sexes and age groups and investigated reliability and validity evidence. Dutch secondary school students ( N = 1504) and university students ( N = 629) completed the AMAS and reported their math grades. Subsamples also completed questionnaires on related (e.g., trait anxiety) and unrelated constructs (e.g., anxiety for learning a foreign language). Results of multi-group Confirmatory Factor Analyses showed the 2-factor structure that was detected in earlier studies and supported partial metric and scalar invariance, although cross-loadings for one item were included for the female university students group to improve model fit. Reliability ranged from acceptable to good and validity was supported.

Background Impulsivity is a core feature of attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Previous work using the delay discounting task to assess impulsivity reveals that adolescents with ADHD tend to prefer a smaller‐immediate reward over a larger‐delayed reward, and this relates to problematic choices in daily life. To gain a better understanding of daily decision‐making in adolescence, it is important to examine the social context, as peers have a major influence on decisions. Peer influence often has a negative connotation, but also provides an opportunity to promote positive outcomes. To date, it is unclear if peers affect impulsive decision‐making in adolescents with ADHD, for better or for worse. Methods The aim of this preregistered study was to examine the effect of peer feedback on impulsive choice in male adolescents with and without ADHD (ages 13–23; N = 113). We utilized an adapted delay discounting task that was administered alone, in a social condition, and alone again. In the social condition, adolescents received either (between‐subjects) manipulated impulsive or non‐impulsive peer feedback. Impulsive peer feedback consisted of likes for choosing the smaller immediate reward, whereas non‐impulsive peers endorsed choosing the larger delayed reward. Results Preregistered analyses showed that non‐impulsive peer feedback resulted in decreased impulsive choice, whereas impulsive peer feedback did not alter decision‐making in adolescents with and without ADHD. Explorative analyses of inattention and hyperactivity‐impulsivity symptoms in the total sample, irrespective of diagnosis, showed that lower hyperactivity–impulsivity and more inattention symptoms were associated with increased susceptibility to non‐impulsive peer feedback. Conclusions Together, these findings indicate that peers may provide an opportunity to decrease impulsivity and emphasize individual differences in susceptibility to non‐impulsive peer feedback related to inattention and hyperactivity–impulsivity. Therefore, peer feedback may be a promising component in behavioral peer‐supported interventions in adolescents with ADHD.