Class B
Backward stepwise multiple regression was used to explain student stress of Class
B. No significant model explained student stress given the independent variables of
cognitive style gap, gender, age, number of similar classes taken and college
classification.
Backward stepwise multiple regression was used to explain student motivation of
Class B to find the best fitting model. One variable, efficiency cognitive style gap,
explained 19% of the variance in student motivation (p=-.46, Adjusted R2=.19). The
model indicates that students in Class B with an innovative 5-point efficiency style gap
with the faculty member have an average total motivation score of 27.00 as opposed to
students with no efficiency style gap having a total motivation score of 29.35, a 2.35
point difference. The researcher concluded that in Class B, students with a higher
innovative efficiency cognitive style gap with this more adaptive faculty member have
less motivation. This finding indicated that as student efficiency cognitive style gap
moved from adaptiveness to innovativeness students have decreased levels of motivation.
See Table 4-67 for the unstandardized coefficient (B), intercept (Constant), and
standardized coefficient (0).
Table 4-67. Class B Backward Stepwise Multiple Regression Explaining Student Total
Motivation (n=45)
Model
Construct B SE Beta t. Sign. F Sign.
(Constant) 29.35 0.69 42.56 .00 11.54 .01
Efficiency gap -0.47 0.14 -.46 -3.40 .01
Note. Adjusted R2=. 19
Class C
For Class C, backward stepwise regression was used to explain total student
stress. The best fitting model left three variables including sufficiency of originality