Preliminary Investigation of a Mindfulness-Based Intervention for Social Anxiety Disorder That Integrates Compassion Meditation and Mindful Exposure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the feasibility and initial efficacy of a 12-week group mindfulness-based intervention tailored for persons with social anxiety disorder (MBI-SAD). The intervention includes elements of the standard mindfulness-based stress reduction program, explicit training in self-compassion aimed at cultivating a more accepting and kinder stance toward oneself, and use of exposure procedures to help participants practice responding mindfully to internal experiences evoked by feared social situations. METHODS: Participants were randomly assigned to the MBI-SAD (n = 21) or a waitlist (WL) (n = 18) control group. Feasibility was assessed by the number of participants who completed at least 75% of the 12 weekly group sessions. Primary efficacy outcomes were clinician- and self-rated measures of social anxiety. Other outcomes included clinician ratings of illness severity and self-rated depression, social adjustment, mindfulness, and self-compassion. RESULTS: The MBI-SAD was acceptable and feasible, with 81% of participants attending at least 75% of sessions. The MBI-SAD fared better than WL in improving social anxiety symptom severity (p ≤ 0.0001), depression (p ≤ 0.05), and social adjustment (p ≤ 0.05). The intervention also enhanced self-compassion (p ≤ 0.05), and facets of mindfulness (observe and aware; p ≤ .05). MBI-SAD treatment gains were maintained at 3-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary findings suggest that an MBI that integrates explicit training in self-compassion and mindful exposure is a feasible and promising intervention for social anxiety disorder. The next step is to compare the MBI-SAD to the gold standard of cognitive-behavior therapy to determine equivalence or noninferiority and to explore mediators and moderators of treatment outcome.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".