DEFAULT THINKING AND COMPETITIVE ANXIETY: A MODERATED MEDIATION MODEL VIA COGNITIVE FLEXIBILITY BY GENDER AND ACADEMIC SPECIALIZATION

Default thinking has been increasingly linked to emotional regulation processes; however, its role in shaping competitive anxiety remains theoretically inconsistent. The existing evidence indicates that the relationship between these two concepts depends on the presence of cognitive. This study aimed to examine a moderated mediation model linking default thinking to competitive anxiety through cognitive flexibility, while investigating the moderating roles of gender and academic specialization. The research used a simulated dataset which contained 380 samples that were designed to replicate the distributional characteristics and effect size measurements of the original dataset. The participants were divided into four subgroups based on their gender distribution which had 60% female participants and their academic specialization between science and humanities fields. Results: ender significantly moderated the a-path (VVIQ → CFS), with a strong effect among females (B = 0.290, p < .001) but not males (B = 0.085, p = .180; z = −2.82, p = .005), while no gender differences were found in the b-path or direct effect. No differences emerged across academic specialization (p > .56). Despite a significant interaction (B = 0.205, p = .003), the indirect effect was non-significant overall (CIs included zero), reflecting a weak b-path. Mediation was significant only in the Female–Science subgroup (B = −0.105, 95% CI [−0.192, −0.022]). Cognitive flexibility reduced anxiety only in the science group (B = −0.307, p < .001), and Bayesian analysis confirmed additional direct pathways (χ² = 22.54, p = .032). The results indicate that competitive anxiety depends on multiple factors which include how default thinking operates in different groups through its specific mechanisms and its common pathways. A single unified mediation model is insufficient to capture this complexity.