Abstract
This qualitative study seeks to address how high school students preparing for the university entrance examination navigate their experiences during mock exams. The participants were 50 high school students. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis, which yielded six major themes: the subject that started at the beginning of the exam session, responses to challenging questions, environmental and internal distractions during the exam, emotional reactions when torn between two options, coping strategies under time pressure, and procedures related to optical form completion. Themes offered deeper insight into students’ stress responses, time management struggles, and decision-making processes during test-taking.
Introduction
In Türkiye, university admission is determined by students’ performance in the Higher Education Institutions Examination (YKS), a high-stakes national exam administered in two stages. In 2026, approximately 2.5 million students registered for the YKS, with 881,470 (24.98%) of them being high school seniors (ÖSYM, 2026). Preparation for the YKS extends beyond individual study. Teachers and school-based psychological counselors provide academic and emotional support, including strategies for test anxiety, question solving, and attention (Kumandaş & Kutlu, 2014). Yet prolonged preparation can strain family communication and social life, and the centrality of the exam may create interpersonal conflict (Ünsal, 2024). Research has linked exam success with test anxiety (Atlı & Gür, 2022; Uyar & Canpolat, 2023), sociodemographic and socioeconomic conditions (Turan Kurtaran et al., 2021; Selvitopu & Kaya, 2023), parental education (Başol & Zabun, 2014), and motivation (Koca & Dadandı, 2019). This literature has informed support intended to help students manage anxiety and other challenges before the exam (Németh & Bernáth, 2022; Özbaş et al., 2012). Mock exams add a situational form of preparation by reproducing the testing environment and allowing students to rehearse exam-day behaviors. School psychological counselors also use these exams to evaluate questions and student performance. However, less is known about what students think, feel, and do during the exam itself.
Flow theory provides a framework for examining these in-exam experiences. It describes a state of deep concentration in which action and awareness merge, attention is directed fully toward the task, and intrinsic motivation supports performance (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975, 1990). Flow is most likely when perceived challenge matches the individual's skills; tasks that seem too easy may produce boredom, whereas demands that exceed perceived ability may produce anxiety (Moneta, 2004).
Exams are cognitively and emotionally demanding tasks in which students must regulate attention despite uncertainty, time pressure, and environmental distraction (Csikszentmihalyi, 2005, 1990). Examining students’ moment-to-moment decisions can therefore clarify how challenge–skill balance, focus, and emotional regulation support or disrupt flow. This perspective extends research beyond the well-documented conditions before and after an exam to the period in which prior preparation is translated into performance.
Test-taking advice commonly recommends reviewing the booklet, beginning with easier or more familiar questions, limiting the time spent on each item, and returning to difficult questions later (Hamilton, 2003; Özakpınar, 2019; Schewe, 2022). Much of this advice, however, is based on experience rather than direct evidence about students’ in-exam behavior.
Accordingly, this qualitative study examined students’ behaviors, emotions, and cognitive strategies during a 160-min mock university entrance examination. It aimed to describe real-time decisions, particularly under uncertainty and stress, and to address the gap between research on pre-exam preparation and post-exam outcomes. The research questions were:
Which course do students start the exam with and why do they choose this course? What do students do when they encounter a difficult question in an exam? What do students do when they are torn between two options? What are the factors that disturb students during the exam? How do students code their answers? What do students do when there is insufficient time to complete the exam?
Method
Research Design
This qualitative case study examined students’ mock-exam experiences in their real context (Creswell, 2020; Özdemir & Tuti, 2023). The case comprised 50 students preparing for the Basic Proficiency Test (TYT) in a province in southeastern Türkiye. Participants included 37 11th-grade students (74%) and 13 12th-grade students (26%), aged 15–18 years (M = 16.36); their mean year-end achievement score was 80.10. Participant characteristics are presented in Table 1.
Demographic Information of Participants.
Instruments
The exam-moment evaluation form was a researcher-developed semistructured interview form with two parts. The first collected demographic information; the second examined six areas: the course attempted first, responses to a difficult question, decisions when caught between two options, disturbing factors, optical-form coding, and reactions when time was insufficient. The questions drew on test-taking recommendations by Hamilton (2003) and Özakpınar (2019) and covered experience, thoughts, emotions, knowledge, sensory conditions, and background information as recommended by Patton (2014). Personal information form recorded age, gender, grade, academic track, school type, and achievement information.
After school administrators and psychological counselors were informed, the first author explained the study to eligible students and obtained their consent. Semistructured interviews were conducted in the school counselor's office immediately after the TYT mock examination on May 20, 2023, and lasted 15–20 min.
Data Analysis
Interview data were managed, coded, and visualized in NVivo 11 (Bazeley & Jackson, 2013). Qualitative content analysis followed the stages proposed by Birmingham and ve Wilkinson (2003), as summarized in Figure 1.
Qualitative content analysis stages.
The data analysis process is shown in Figure 2. For qualitative data content analysis, the qualitative content analysis steps developed by Birmingham and ve Wilkinson (2003) were used.
Qualitative content data analysis stages.
The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the İnönü University Social and Human Sciences Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Committee (May 10, 2023; No. E.302401E.82089). Participant consent was obtained, and pseudonyms were used to protect identity.
Findings
Content analysis produced six themes: (1) the course attempted first, (2) reactions to a difficult question, (3) reactions when caught between two choices, (4) disturbing factors, (5) optical coding procedures, and (6) reactions when time was insufficient. Because students could mention more than one response, category frequencies may exceed the number of participants (Figure 3).
Thematic graph showing the six themes.
The Course Started at the Examination
Most students began the examination with Turkish, while only one began with mathematics (Table 2).
Frequency Table for the Course in Which the Examination Started.
Students generally began with Turkish because they considered it less mentally tiring, it appeared first in the booklet, or they felt successful in the subject. Berivan explained, “I start with the Turkish lesson because Turkish is a lesson I can do and understand.” Others followed the booklet in order to avoid shifting answers on the optical form. The only student who began with mathematics attributed this choice to liking the subject (Figure 4).
The first lesson started.
Reactions to a Difficult Question
Students responded to a difficult question either by attempting to solve it through several strategies or by skipping it directly (Table 3).
Frequency Table of Reactions When Faced with a Difficult Question.
Attempts included rereading the question, returning to it after completing the section, guessing, or ultimately leaving it blank. Melike described rereading a difficult item, returning to it later, and leaving it unanswered when it remained unclear. Students who skipped immediately treated this as an exam strategy that protected time for other questions (Figure 5).
Reactions when faced with a difficult question.
Reactions When Caught Between Two Choices
When caught between two options, students marked the option that seemed closer, left the item blank, or guessed (Table 4).
Frequency Table of Reactions When Caught Between Two Options.
The dominant strategy relied on an intuitive sense of which option was more plausible, although some students recognized that this could be misleading. Others left the item blank to avoid risk, particularly when uncertainty produced stress. Merve explained, “When I am torn between two choices, I wonder if I should mark a choice, then I think what if it is wrong and I leave it blank.” A smaller group selected the first option that came to mind (Figure 6).
Reactions when faced with a choice between two options.
Disturbing Factors During Examination
Students reported noise, headache, thoughts unrelated to the exam, anxiety, unsuitable room temperature, and fatigue as disturbing factors (Table 5).
Frequency Table of Disturbing Factors During the Examination.
Noise was the most prominent distraction. One student described squeaking clothing, a shaking desk, and sounds from the corridor as barriers to concentration. Headache and intrusive thoughts also disrupted attention; Musa noted, “When I read the exam questions, my mind suddenly goes somewhere else.” (Figure 7).
Disturbing factors during the exam.
Optical Coding Procedure
Students coded the optical form immediately after each question, at the end of each page, after completing a course section, or after finishing the booklet (Table 6).
Frequency Table of Optical Coding Procedure.
Coding immediately after each question was the most common procedure and was perceived to prevent confusion. Other students transferred answers page by page or after completing all questions in a course section (Figure 8).
Optical coding procedure.
Reactions When Time is Not Enough
When time was insufficient, students left remaining items blank, attempted to work faster, guessed, or prioritized shorter questions (Table 7).
Frequency Table of Reactions When Time is Not Enough.
Time pressure often triggered anxiety and physical arousal. Ezgi described being unable to read when she panicked, while Berivan reported trembling and trying to work more quickly. As the remaining time decreased, students accelerated their responses, focused on questions they could complete quickly, or guessed (Figure 9).
Reactions when time is not enough.
Conclusion and Discussion
This study described what students experienced during a mock university entrance examination. The six themes show that course order, responses to difficulty and uncertainty, environmental distraction, optical coding, and time pressure jointly shape attention and decision-making during the exam.
Examination Started Course
Beginning with Turkish appeared to be a strategic effort to establish confidence and protect attention. Turkish has the highest national average of correct responses (ÖSYM, 2023), and students described it as familiar, less tiring, or personally successful. Starting with a manageable task may support intrinsic motivation and engagement (Deci & Ryan, 1987) and is consistent with flow theory's challenge–skill balance. The predictive relationship between achievement in Turkish and other courses may also help explain this preference (Bloom, 1976; Güneyli et al., 2010).
Reactions to a Difficult Question
Students either persisted with difficult items or skipped them to protect time. Persistence, including rereading and revisiting an item, suggests an effort to maintain engagement when the challenge remains manageable. Immediate skipping may indicate that perceived difficulty exceeded perceived skill and disrupted intrinsic motivation (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). Guessing represented a pragmatic response to uncertainty and the possibility of gaining points (Karadağ, 2021; Lee, 2019).
Reactions When Caught Between Two Choices
When two options seemed plausible, students balanced perceived correctness against the risk of an incorrect answer. Intuitive selection, leaving the item blank, and immediate guessing reflect different approaches to uncertainty. Because stress can impair attention, working memory, and decision-making (Starcke & Brand, 2012), students who experienced greater risk or stress may have been more likely to avoid responding.
Disturbing Factors During Examination
Noise was the clearest environmental barrier to concentration. From a flow perspective, unexpected sounds compete for attention and interrupt task absorption. This interpretation aligns with evidence that school and classroom noise can impair cognitive performance and well-being (Denli, 2020; Klatte et al., 2010; Shield & Dockrell, 2008). Headache, anxiety, and intrusive thoughts similarly redirected cognitive resources away from the examination.
Optical Coding Procedure
Most students coded each answer immediately, while others coded by page, course section, or booklet. Immediate coding may reduce concern about shifting answers and permit continuous task progress; coding in blocks may reduce transitions between the booklet and optical form. The data do not establish which procedure is more efficient, but they show that students choose coding routines to manage attention and perceived error risk.
Reactions When Time is Not Enough
As time decreased, students accelerated, selected shorter questions, guessed, or left items blank. These reactions indicate that time pressure disturbed attention and the perceived balance between task demands and available skill. Anxiety and physical symptoms further restricted performance, consistent with the worry and affective dimensions of test anxiety (Öner, 1990; Peltier et al., 2022). Thus, maintaining flow during an exam depends not only on motivation but also on conditions that allow students to regulate time and anxiety (Egbert, 2004).
Limitations and Future Research
The study involved 50 students from Anatolian and Multi-Program Anatolian High Schools in one province, which limits transferability. Interviews conducted immediately after the exam captured fresh accounts, but fatigue and students’ eagerness to leave may have reduced their depth. The findings also concern multiple-choice mock examinations and may not apply to written or oral formats. Future studies should include more diverse settings and exam types and should compare students’ reported strategies with performance data.
Implications
School psychological counselors should help students identify the course order, difficult-item strategy, and optical-coding routine that best support their attention and time use.
Counseling sessions and mock-exam debriefings should include brief breathing, relaxation, and time-management practices for responding to pressure without abandoning the task.
Schools should minimize avoidable noise and physical discomfort during mock and high-stakes examinations and should teach students coping strategies for unavoidable distraction.
Counselors should involve teachers and parents in recognizing that exam performance reflects emotional and situational conditions as well as academic preparation.
Footnotes
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.