MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019242362 · doi:10.1177/1073191107306673

Development and Examination of the Social Appearance Anxiety Scale

2008· article· en· W2019242362 on OpenAlexaff
Trevor Hart, David B. Flora, Sarah A. Palyo, David M. Fresco, Christian Holle, Richard G. Heimberg

Bibliographic record

VenueAssessment · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySocial anxietyAnxietyScale (ratio)FeelingHuman physical appearancePsychometricsFear of negative evaluationReliability (semiconductor)Clinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Social Appearance Anxiety Scale (SAAS) was created to measure anxiety about being negatively evaluated by others because of one's overall appearance, including body shape. This study examined the psychometric properties of the SAAS in three large samples of undergraduate students (respective ns = 512, 853, and 541). The SAAS demonstrated a unifactorial structure with high test-retest reliability and internal consistency. The SAAS was positively associated with measures of social anxiety. The SAAS was also related to greater disparity between perceived, actual, and ideal physical attributes, beliefs that one's appearance is inherently flawed and socially unacceptable and that being unattractive is socially deleterious, feelings of unattractiveness, emphasis on appearance and its maintenance, and a preoccupation with being overweight. It was a unique predictor of social anxiety above and beyond negative body image indicators. Findings suggest that the SAAS is a psychometrically valid measure of social anxiety regarding one's overall appearance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations479
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAssessmentSame topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesFrench-language works237,207