MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2116555234 · doi:10.1177/070674370505000604

Are We Overpathologizing the Socially Anxious? Social Phobia from a Harmful Dysfunction Perspective

2005· article· en· W2116555234 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

venuePublié dans une revue dont le pays d'attache est le Canada.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2005
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueMental Health and Psychiatry
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPhobiasPsychologyAnxietySocial anxietyAnxiety disorderShynessHarmPsychiatryAvoidant personality disorderPhobic disorderClinical psychologyPersonalityPsychotherapistPersonality disordersSocial psychology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Some social phobias are clearly genuine mental disorders. However, in just 2 decades, social phobia (or social anxiety disorder) went from rare (in the DSM-III) to common (1), amidst changing criteria and concern about caseness thresholds (2). The evidence suggests that social anxiety is a normal, species-typical, designed response to specific triggering situations, one that is roughly normally distributed in temperamental intensity (3,4). This raises the question, Is temperamentally high but nondisordered social anxiety being mislabelled a disorder? We argue that many, perhaps most, people whom the DSM-IV potentially classifies as suffering from social phobia are probably not disordered. Stein, a prolific writer on social phobia, asks the right question: Are we needlessly 'medicalising' a normal variant of temperament, performing cosmetic psychopharmacology to remove blemishes of the personality? (5). His answer: No. However, his reasons-that generalized social phobia is extreme on the social anxiety spectrum, undesired, and disabling in some social roles-also apply to many nondisordered features (for example, grief, homeliness, shortness, or selfishness). Moreover, roughly one-half of community diagnoses are nongeneralized cases. Further, neither biological differences between more and less anxious individuals nor findings that social anxiety runs in families show whether the more anxious are disordered or normal variants. Such correlates do not allow us to avoid the difficult conceptual question, When is social anxiety disordered? The harmful dysfunction analysis of disorder (6-8), used here, holds that disorders are dysfunctions that cause harm, with dysfunctions defined as failures of mental or physical mechanisms to perform biologically designed functions. Problematic mismatches between designed human nature and current social desirability are not disorders; for example, such negative but biologically designed conditions as adulterous longings, taste for fat and sugar, and male aggressiveness are not in themselves disordered. Also, the extremes of normally distributed features are not necessarily disorders; it depends on whether they involve dysfunctions. Judgments about normal and dysfunctional social anxiety remain at best plausible speculations. However, normal social anxiety is likely an adaptation preventing individuals from easily risking status in the group (9). In early environments, social groups were small and composed of familiars who cooperated but were nonetheless in competition for status and resources. Remaining an accepted group member despite such competition was critical to survival. A range of strategics balancing pursuit of status and avoidance of rejection-including some strategies involving high anxiety about placing oneself in social jeopardy and readiness for submission should jeopardy occur-likely had selective advantages. Moreover, normal social anxiety is exacerbated in our mass society, wherein we routinely negotiate new social hierarchies and, in some occupations, confront situations that tend to trigger anxiety by biological design. Our egalitarian society considers submissive displays that might reduce anxiety to be potentially embarrassing; consequently, they may be inhibited, further heightening anxiety. Substantial social anxiety under certain circumstances is thus compatible with normality. What, then, distinguishes social phobia from normal social anxiety? Social anxiety is uncomfortable and thus involves harm. Whether it is disordered depends on whether a dysfunction exists; that is, whether mechanisms that generate and regulate social anxiety fail to perform their function of minimizing risk while allowing social interaction. Such dysfunction involves greatly disproportionate anxiety intensity relative to the triggering situation: anxiety reaches debilitating levels in species-expectable tasks or remains intense when biologically plausible triggers are absent or minimal, for example, during interaction with family members or other nonthreatening familiars; or when engaging in basic functions, such as eating away from home; or in situations where there is no real social scrutiny or chance of losing status, such as sitting anonymously in a lecture hall. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,904
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,998

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,047
Tête enseignante GPT0,270
Écart entre enseignants0,223 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle