Association of social and life threats with symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder and social anxiety disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study examined psychological reactions to perceived threats, viewed within the context of human evolutionary history. We compared the relative weight of perceived threat to life or physical harm versus social threat, i.e., humiliation and/or rejection, in symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and social anxiety disorder (SAD). METHODS: Participants were 50 women with clinically significant posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) and 59 women with little or no PTSS (control group) selected from a large, population-based cohort of women in Iceland, the SAGA Cohort. Participants rated (1) life threat, (2) physical threat, (3) humiliation, and (4) rejection during their worst trauma or stressor. RESULTS: Rates of both life and social threats were higher in the PTSS than control group. Among the PTSS participants, 4 % (n = 2) reported primarily life threats (vs. 6.8 %, n = 4 in controls), 36 % (n = 18) reported primarily social threats (vs. 33.9 %, n = 20 in controls), and 60 % (n = 30) reported both types of threats (vs. 15.3 %, n = 9 in controls). Those who reported dual life and social threats exhibited elevated PTSS compared to those who experienced a single type of threat. The highest levels of life or physical threat, along with humiliation, predicted PTSS severity, but rejection did not. Nearly half of the PTSS group (approximately 50 %, n = 25) also met criteria for SAD compared to roughly 14 % (n = 8) in the control group, and humiliation predicted SAD symptom severity. Notably, 18 % of the PTSS group (n = 9) linked the onset of their SAD and PTSS to a singular trauma or stressor involving a social threat. CONCLUSIONS: The findings underscore the role of social threat in PTSD and SAD, with implications for theoretical models of both disorders.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".