Impact of Social Anxiety on Behavioral Mimicry During a Social Interaction With a Confederate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Behavioral mimicry, the unintentional alteration of one's behavior to match that of an interaction partner, leads to many positive outcomes such as increased rapport. The current study examined the influence of social anxiety on mimicry behavior during a social interaction. Participants (N = 84), pre-screened for low and high social anxiety, participated in a face-to-face interaction with a confederate. Individuals with high social anxiety were less likely to mimic the movements of the confederate than individuals with low social anxiety. However, reduced mimicry behavior was only found during the portion of the experiment in which the confederate's movements were not planned, and not during the portion of the experiment in which the confederate made planned movements. Further, individuals with increased self-focused attention were also less likely to mimic during the portion of the experiment where the confederate's movements were not planned. Overall, results provide partial evidence to support the notion of reduced mimicry among individuals with high social anxiety. Future research can further evaluate the contexts in which those with high levels of social anxiety may mimic less, as well as factors that may play a role (e.g., self-focused attention), to enhance the probability of a positive interpersonal interaction for these individuals.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".