Attitudes Toward Statistics as Predictors of Learning Strategy in Statistics Education: A Logistic Regression Analysis

Authors

Nurhasniza Idham Abu Hasan

School of Mathematical Sciences Studies, Faculty of Computer and Mathematical Sciences, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Perak Branch, Tapah Campus, Malaysia (Malaysia)

Nur Faezah Jamal

School of Mathematical Sciences Studies, Faculty of Computer and Mathematical Sciences, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Perak Branch, Tapah Campus, Malaysia (Malaysia)

Article Information

DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS.2026.100601337

Subject Category: Education

Volume/Issue: 10/6 | Page No: 19584-19591

Publication Timeline

Submitted: 2026-07-02

Accepted: 2026-07-07

Published: 2026-07-18

Abstract

Statistics is a core competency in higher education; however, many undergraduates approach introductory statistics courses with anxiety, low confidence, and perceptions of difficulty that may influence their learning strategies. This study investigated whether multidimensional attitudes toward statistics predicted undergraduate students’ adoption of deep rather than surface learning strategies. A quantitative cross-sectional study was conducted among 306 undergraduates enrolled in introductory statistics courses at a Malaysian public university. Data were collected using adapted versions of the Survey of Attitudes Toward Statistics (SATS-36) and the Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F). Binary logistic regression was employed to estimate the probability of adopting a deep learning strategy based on six attitudinal dimensions: affect, cognitive competence, value, perceived difficulty, interest, and effort. The findings indicated that effort was the strongest positive predictor of deep learning strategy adoption (OR = 2.475, 95% CI [1.511, 4.051]), followed by interest (OR = 1.871, 95% CI [1.132, 3.093]). Conversely, perceived difficulty was negatively associated with the adoption of a deep learning strategy (OR = 0.493, 95% CI [0.258, 0.942]), indicating that students who perceived statistics as more difficult were less likely to adopt a deep learning strategy. The model achieved an overall classification accuracy of 67.0% and demonstrated greater accuracy in identifying deep learners than surface learners. These findings highlight the importance of strengthening students’ effort and interest while reducing perceived difficulty to promote deeper engagement with statistical learning in higher education.

Keywords

Binary logistic regression; Deep learning; Learning strategies; SATS-36; Statistics attitude; Surface learning

Downloads

References

1. Levpušček, M. P., & Cukon, M. (2022). That old devil called ‘statistics’: Statistics anxiety in university students and related factors. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 12(1), 147-168. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Maat, S. M., Ahmad, N., & Zakaria, E. (2016). Engineering students' engineering and statistics attitudes. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(12), 5131-5140. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Zeidner, M. (1991). Statistics and mathematics anxiety in social science students: Some interesting parallels. British journal of educational psychology, 61(3), 319-328. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Coetzee, S., & Merwe, P. V. D. (2010). Industrial psychology students' attitudes towards statistics. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 36(1), 1-8. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Schau, C., Stevens, J., Dauphinee, T. L., & Vecchio, A. D. (1995). The development and validation of the survey of attitudes toward statistics. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55(5), 868-875. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Ghulami, H. R., Hamid, M. R. A., & Zakaria, R. (2015). Students’ attitudes towards learning statistics. In AIP conference proceedings (Vol. 1660, No. 1, p. 050035). AIP Publishing LLC. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Saidi, S. S., & Siew, N. M. (2018). Assessing students' attitudes towards statistics in a secondary school in Sabah. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 7(4), 253-259. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Ashaari, N. S., Judi, H. M., Mohamed, H., & Wook, M. T. (2011). Student's attitude towards statistics course. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 18, 287-294. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Biggs, J., Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. (2001). The revised two‐factor study process questionnaire: R‐SPQ‐2F. British journal of educational psychology, 71(1), 133-149. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2017). Teaching for quality learning at university (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Hamm, S., & Robertson, I. (2010). Preferences for deep-surface learning: A vocational education case study using a multimedia assessment activity. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(7), 951-965. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Dolmans, D. H., Loyens, S. M., Marcq, H., & Gijbels, D. (2016). Deep and surface learning in problem-based learning: a review of the literature. Advances in health sciences education, 21(5), 1087-1112. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Sesé, A., Abad, F. J., & Palmer, A. (2015). Predictive model of course success in introductory undergraduate statistics. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 52(2), 150-161. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Mahlan, S. B., Shamsuddin, M., Umar, N., & Hamat, M. (2023). Determining the Factors that Impacting Students' Attitude for Statistics Subject. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 12(4), 88-98. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Hosmer Jr, D. W., Lemeshow, S., & Sturdivant, R. X. (2013). Applied logistic regression. John Wiley & Sons. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Schau, C. (2003). Students’ attitudes: The “other” important outcome in statistics education. In Proceedings of the joint statistical meetings (pp. 3673-3681). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Sonderen, E. V., Sanderman, R., & Coyne, J. C. (2013). Ineffectiveness of reverse wording of questionnaire items: Let’s learn from cows in the rain. PloS one, 8(7), e68967. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Guo, Y., Rong, S., Dong, J., Ji, T., Niu, Y., & Guan, H. (2024). Perceptions of attitudes toward statistics among medical undergraduates: Insights from a regional medical college in China. BMC Medical Education, 24, 579. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Ayebo, A. (2025). Examining the attitudes of students before and after a course in introductory statistics. Mathematics Teaching Research Journal, 17(5), 334-354. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Dodeen, H., & Alharballeh, S. (2025). Predicting statistic anxiety by attitude toward statistics, statistics self-efficacy, achievement in statistics and academic procrastination among students of social sciences colleges. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 17(4), 1376-1393. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Mendes, R. A., Loxton, N. J., Browning, N. G., & Lawrence, R. K. (2025). The effect of psychological interventions on statistics anxiety, statistics self-efficacy, and attitudes toward statistics in university students: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 37, Article 3. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Vanhoof, S., Kuppens, S., Castro Sotos, A. E., Verschaffel, L., & Onghena, P. (2011). Measuring statistics attitudes: Structure of the Survey of Attitudes Toward Statistics (SATS-36). Statistics Education Research Journal, 10(1), 35-51. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Li, C., Zhang, Y., Qin, W., Xia, J., Shang, L., & Wang, L. (2024). Assessing attitudes towards biostatistics education among medical students: Adaptation and preliminary evaluation of the Chinese version Survey of Attitudes Towards Statistics (SATS-36). BMC Medical Education, 24, 634. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Cook, K. D., & Catanzaro, B. A. (2023). "Constantly Working on My Attitude Towards Statistics!" Education Doctoral Students' Experiences with and Motivations for Learning Statistics. Innovative Higher Education, 48(2), 257–284. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

Metrics

Views & Downloads

Similar Articles