Self-Presentational Efficacy: Its Influence on Social Anxiety in an Exercise Context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to examine the influence of self-presentational efficacy on social anxiety in an exercise context. Participants for this study were 68 female exercisers. Self-presentational efficacy was manipulated in two groups, high and low efficacy. Individuals in the low efficacy group showed higher levels of three measures of social anxiety (social anxiety in exercise classes M = 17.69, physical appearance anxiety M = 17.69, and social physique anxiety M = 30.89) than those in the high efficacy group (social anxiety in exercise classes M = 12.34, p < .001, physical appearance anxiety M = 12.71, p < .013, and social physique anxiety M = 25.87, p < .003). Furthermore, participants in the low efficacy group ( M = 3.47) indicated that they were looking less forward to the upcoming aerobics class compared to those in the high efficacy group ( M = 6.68, p < .001). Thus it appears that self-presentational efficacy has a potent influence on social anxiety in exercise contexts. Potential applications to exercise settings and future research are discussed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".