Treatment of social approach processes in adults with social anxiety disorder.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Despite the social impairment associated with social anxiety disorder (SAD), little research has examined the impact of treatment on positive relational functioning. Accordingly, the authors conducted a treatment outcome study to evaluate a cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) regimen augmented by a relational focus (CBT-R) relative to a graduated exposure-applied relaxation (GEAR) regimen and wait list (WL) control. To examine the mechanism(s) that underlies treatment effects, they used structural equation modeling (SEM) to evaluate two potential mediators, change in judgment biases and in safety behaviors. METHOD: Treatment-seeking adults who met SAD diagnostic criteria (n = 100; 50% women; mean age = 32.9 years.; 36% ethnic minority) were randomly assigned to CBT-R, GEAR, or WL. CBT-R and GEAR participants received 14 group treatment sessions. Social initiation, relationship satisfaction, and a SAD symptom composite were assessed at pre- and postassessment, and 6- and 12-month follow-ups. RESULTS: Intent-to-treat multilevel modeling analyses indicated that the CBT-R regimen resulted in significantly greater improvement relative to GEAR on relationship satisfaction and SAD symptoms. SEM results revealed that change in safety behaviors partially mediated the superior performance of CBT-R on both variables with confidence intervals set at .90. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that CBT-based regimens can improve social approach processes in individuals with SAD and that safety behavior reduction contributes to positive outcomes. (PsycINFO Database Record
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".