A Cross-Cultural Investigation of Shyness in Adults and Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shyness is considered a universal phenomenon and has been studied scientifically for over four decades in different cultures, but considerably less is known about whether shyness measures are equivalent across countries, and whether different types of shyness exist and are conserved across countries. Chapters 2 to 4 of this dissertation include empirical studies that examine differences in shyness in adults and children from a cross-cultural perspective, addressing issues of measurement, specificity, and heterogeneity. I examined the measurement invariance of Cheek and Buss (CBSS) shyness and sociability scales, respectively, and further tested the mean-level differences in shyness and sociability between Chinese and Canadian young adults, respectively (Chapters 2 and 3). I also examined measurement invariance of the eastern created Chinese Shyness Scale (CSS) between Chinese and Canadian preschool children and whether the cultural context moderated the relations between shy behavior and the social anxiety (Chapter 4). In Chapter 2, I report that the CBSS-shyness measure was largely invariant and supported meaningful comparisons of average levels of shyness across our two culturally defined groups. Chinese young adults had significantly higher mean levels of shyness than Canadian young adults. In Chapter 3, I report that the sociability construct was not equivalent across our Chinese and Canadian samples. These results suggest that any mean-level comparisons using the CBSS-sociability scale among the samples were biased and ultimately uninformative, even though sociability scores were lower in Chinese versus Canadian young adults. In Chapter 4, I report that both anxious and regulated forms of shyness were identifiable and distinguishable in both the Chinese and Canadian samples, with differential relations between the two subtypes and social anxiety moderated by culture. Collectively, the findings from this dissertation suggested that culture plays an important role in the interpretation and expression of shyness and related constructs.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".