To see ourselves as others see us: An experimental integration of the intra and interpersonal consequences of self-protection in social anxiety disorder.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study investigated the mechanism through which safety behaviors perpetuate perceived and actual negative social outcomes hypothesized to maintain social anxiety disorder (SAD). Eighty individuals diagnosed with generalized SAD took part in a "getting acquainted" conversation with a trained experimental confederate. Participants were then randomly assigned to either a safety behavior reduction plus exposure condition (SB + EXP) or a graduated exposure (EXP) control condition and completed a 2nd conversation with the same interaction partner. Mediation analyses revealed that participants instructed to reduce their idiosyncratic safety behaviors displayed significantly greater increases in both perceived and actual positive interpersonal outcomes relative to the EXP group. However, whereas the safety behavior manipulation influenced participants' appraisals of their partner's reaction to them through reducing self-judgments about the visibility of anxiety-related behaviors, in reality, the SB + EXP group elicited more positive partner reactions because they displayed a greater increase in social approach behavior. Thus, although both parties recognized positive changes in the social exchange following the safety behavior manipulation, different sources of social information accounted for participant versus partner interpersonal judgments. The current findings point to the potential value of considering both the intra and interpersonal consequences of safety behaviors in SAD.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".