MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078966924 · doi:10.1002/da.20004

Appraisal of Social Concerns: A cognitive assessment instrument for social phobia

2004· article· en· W2078966924 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

VenueDepression and Anxiety · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyClinical psychologyReliability (semiconductor)CognitionPsychological interventionConstruct validityLearned helplessnessExploratory factor analysisInternal consistencyPsychometricsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current study describes the validation of a new cognitive assessment measure for social phobia, entitled the Appraisal of Social Concerns (ASC). Item content is relevant to a range of social situations. The ASC can be used to tailor interventions to patients' idiosyncratic concerns. Data are presented from both clinical (n = 71) and non-clinical (n = 550) samples. Preliminary data indicate that the ASC has good internal consistency and test-retest reliability. The construct validity of the ASC is comparable to that of well-established measures in use with social phobics. A strength of the ASC is its sensitivity to the effect of treatment. An exploratory factor analysis yielded three factors tapping concerns about negative evaluation, observable symptoms, and social helplessness. Subscale scores were strongly correlated. Preliminary findings suggest that the ASC is a psychometrically sound, time efficient instrument that can be used for both clinical and research purposes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.358 · 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