Psychometric validation of a monitoring-blunting measure for social anxiety disorder: the coping styles questionnaire for social situations (CSQSS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this investigation was to conduct a psychometric validation of the Coping Styles Questionnaire for Social Situations (CSQSS). The CSQSS was developed to measure monitoring and blunting coping styles in social situations based on Miller's conceptualization of how individuals cope with threat-related information. Study 1 evaluated the content validity of the CSQSS monitoring and blunting items. Study 2 examined factor structure, reliability, and construct validity of the CSQSS in a sample of 443 college students. Evidence supported the content and face validity of the CSQSS. In addition, an exploratory factor analysis revealed a two-factor solution consistent with the monitoring and blunting constructs. Both monitoring and blunting scores were positively correlated with measures of social anxiety, with blunting having a stronger relationship. Moreover, individuals with high social anxiety engaged in a significantly higher degree of monitoring and blunting than did individuals with low social anxiety. Taken together, these results provide support for the reliability and validity of the CSQSS. The CSQSS may serve as a useful measure for further examination of monitoring and blunting coping styles in a social anxiety disorder sample.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".