Class I
Regarding Class I, Two variables, efficiency style gap (P =.29) and age (P =.22)
accounted for 10% of the variance in explaining total student stress (Adjusted R2=.10,
p<.05).
Considering total student motivation of Class I, the same independent variables
were used in backward stepwise regression data analysis to find the best fitting model
with the most explanation of student motivation. Rule/group conformity style gap (3=-
.28) and gender (p=-.20) were both considered significant contributors to the model. The
adjusted R2=.08 indicating that 8% of the variance of total student motivation was
explained by these two independent variables.
All Students
All students participating in this study were grouped together to explain student
stress based on cognitive style gap and student demographic variables. Considering all of
the students, the best fitting model to explain total stress included the independent
variables sufficiency of originality cognitive style gap ( =. 15), college classification (3=-
.11) and number of similar courses taken (P=.09). However, the adjusted R2 was only .03
Considering total motivation of all students participating in this study, backward
stepwise multiple regression was used to find the best fitting model with the most
explanation of the dependent variable using the independent variables cognitive style gap
and student demographics. Three independent variables were found to be significant
(p<.05) in explaining student motivation. They include efficiency cognitive style gap (3=-
.08), gender (P=. 12) and number of similar courses taken by the student (P=. 10).
However, the adjusted R2 was .03 for the model indicating that only 3% of the variance
of motivation was attributed to the three independent variables.