MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309099336 · doi:10.1017/s1352465822000492

The impact of particular safety behaviours on perceived likeability and authenticity during interpersonal interactions in social anxiety disorder

2022· article· en· W4309099336 on OpenAlexaff
Grishma Dabas, Karen Rowa, Irena Milosevic, David A. Moscovitch, Randi E. McCabe

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonUniversity of WaterlooMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyConversationSafety behaviorsSocial anxietyAssociation (psychology)Interpersonal communicationAnxietyMindsetSocial psychologyClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsPsychotherapistPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Safety behaviours are hypothesized to play a vital role in maintaining social anxiety disorder (SAD), in part by orienting socially anxious individuals to adopt an avoidance-based mindset focused on self-protection and self-concealment. Evidence suggests an association between safety behaviour use and negative social outcomes for individuals with SAD. However, research has largely focused on the broad group of safety behaviours, whereas specific subtypes have received less attention. AIM: The present study aimed to further our understanding of the negative interpersonal consequences of specific types of safety behaviours for individuals with SAD by examining whether active, inhibiting/restricting, or physical symptom management safety behaviour use affects perceived likeability and authenticity during a conversation with a stranger. METHOD: 40; mean age 18.6 years) engaged in a semi-structured social interaction with trained confederates. RESULTS: Participants with SAD were perceived as significantly less likeable and authentic by the confederates, and rated themselves as significantly less authentic compared with those without SAD. The association between group status and likeability was mediated by the use of inhibiting/restricting safety behaviours and the association between group status and participant-rated authenticity was mediated by the use of both inhibiting/restricting and active safety behaviours, but not physical symptom management strategies. CONCLUSIONS: These results contribute to a growing literature suggesting that some, but not all, safety behaviours may play an important role in creating the negative social outcomes that individuals with SAD experience.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.332 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioural and Cognitive PsychotherapySame topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesFrench-language works237,207