MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989881139 · doi:10.1080/16506073.2014.961539

Cognitive Constructs and Social Anxiety Disorder: Beyond Fearing Negative Evaluation

2014· article· en· W1989881139 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCognitive Behaviour Therapy · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFear of negative evaluationAnxiety sensitivityPsychologySocial anxietyAnxietyCognitionVariance (accounting)Clinical psychologyStructural equation modelingPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pioneering models of social anxiety disorder (SAD) underscored fear of negative evaluation (FNE) as central in the disorder's development. Additional cognitive predictors have since been identified, including fear of positive evaluation (FPE), anxiety sensitivity, and intolerance of uncertainty (IU), but rarely have these constructs been examined together. The present study concurrently examined the variance accounted for in SAD symptoms by these constructs. Participants meeting criteria for SAD (n = 197; 65% women) completed self-report measures online. FNE, FPE, anxiety sensitivity, and IU all accounted for unique variance in SAD symptoms. FPE accounted for variance comparable to FNE, and the cognitive dimension of anxiety sensitivity and the prospective dimension of IU accounted for comparable variance, though slightly less than that accounted for by FNE and FPE. The results support the theorized roles that these constructs play in the etiology of SAD and highlight both FNE and FPE as central foci in SAD treatment.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.621
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.317 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it