Social Phobia Symptoms, Subtypes, and Severity
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Our goals were (1) to ascertain the range of functional impairment attributable to social phobia in a community sample, and (2) to verify the existence of social phobia subtypes in the community, and report on their relative prevalence, severity, and levels of impairment. METHODS: Community surveys were conducted contemporaneously in Winnipeg, Manitoba, and in Alberta, with a total of 1956 respondents. Instruments included the Comprehensive International Diagnostic Interview-Version 2.1 module for DSM-IV social phobia, enhanced with 6 additional (for a total of 12) social phobic situational probes to provide a more comprehensive assessment of possible subtypes, and additional questions about specific functional impairment due to social phobia. RESULTS: Of those persons in the community surveyed, most had no (60.4%) or few (ie, 1-3) (27.8%) social fears; few persons (3.4%) had many (ie, >/=7). Among those with DSM-IV social phobia (7.2%), classification based on number (normally distributed with median of 3, mode of 5) or content (eg, speaking-only vs other fears; performance-only vs interactional fears) of social fears failed to yield a defensible subtyping solution. Impairment increased linearly as the number of social fears was increased, with no clear threshold evident. CONCLUSIONS: Social phobia is associated with substantial impairment in multiple functional domains. Support for subtyping based on the extent or pattern of social fears was not provided. Rather, social phobia in the community seems to exist on a continuum of severity, with a greater number of feared situations associated with greater disability.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it