Exploring the Links Between Social Anxiety, Performance-Avoidance Goal Orientation, Fear of Negative Evaluation and Task Persistence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study investigated the relationship between social anxiety, performance-avoidance goal orientation, fear of negative evaluation and task persistence. The sample consisted of 84 undergraduate students from the University of Western Ontario recruited through SONA, the web-based participant pool system. Social anxiety, goal orientation and fear of negative evaluation were assessed first using the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS; Mattick & Clarke, 2012), Goal Orientation Instrument (GOI; VandeWalle, 2012) and Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale (Brief-FNE; Leary, 2011), respectively. Participants performed the Remote Associates Test (RAT; McFarlin & Blascovich, 1984) and the amount of time spent on the task was measured as an indicator of task persistence. The PANAS-X (Watson & Clark, 1994) was given at the end of the study to evaluate participants’ affective state following the task. The hypotheses that social interaction anxiety would be positively correlated with performance-avoidance goal orientation and fear of negative evaluation were supported. The hypothesis that social interaction anxiety would be negatively correlated with mastery goal orientation was also supported. Social interaction anxiety was not found to be significantly correlated with task persistence measured by time spent or items completed. As expected, performance-avoidance goal orientation was negatively correlated with task persistence (operationalized as time spent). There was an indirect effect of social interaction anxiety on task persistence through performance-avoidance goal orientation (indirect effect = -1.66, SE = 1.30, 95% CI [-5.29, -.01], direct effect = 1.23, SE = 2.16, 95% CI [-3.06, 5.52]). However, the effect did not hold when FNE was controlled (indirect effect = -1.12, SE = 1.17, 95% CI [-4.64, .19], direct effect = -.67, SE = 2.54, 95% CI [-5.73, 4.38]).
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".