Psychometric properties of the Ryerson Social Anxiety Scales in individuals with social anxiety disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Although numerous self-report measures of social anxiety exist, most instruments assess symptom severity by examining the range of social situations that provoke anxiety, rather than the distress and impairment associated with social anxiety. The Ryerson Social Anxiety Scales (RSAS; Lenton-Brym, A. P., Rogojanski, J., Hood, H. K., Vorstenbosch, V., McCabe, R. E., & Antony, M. M. (2020). Development and validation of the Ryerson Social Anxiety Scales (RSAS). Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 33(6), 642–660), a measure assessing breadth of social anxiety inducing situations and severity of associated distress and impairment, was recently developed to fill this gap. The present study is the first to investigate the psychometric properties of the RSAS in a clinical sample.Method/Design Participants included 110 individuals with a principal diagnosis of social anxiety disorder (SAD). A subsample of participants (n = 23) completed cognitive–behavioural group treatment (CBGT) for SAD.Results The RSAS demonstrated excellent internal consistency. Examination of the correlations between the RSAS and other conceptually related and distinct measures supported the convergent and discriminant validity of the RSAS. The RSAS was also sensitive to changes in severity of social anxiety following CBGT.Conclusion The RSAS is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing the severity of SAD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".