Physiological, cognitive and behavioral aspects of social anxiety

B&n Rr.\ T/w Vol. 23. i\jo. 2. pp. 109-I 17, 1985 Printed ,n Great Bntam All rights reserved

PHYSIOLOGICAL,

CopyrIght

COGNITIVE AND BEHAVIORAL OF SOCIAL ANXIETY

6

0005-7967185 %3.oO+O.C4 I985 Pergamon Press Ltd

ASPECTS

DEBORAHC. BEIDEL,SAMUELM. TURNERand CONSTANCEV. DANCU WesternPsychiatric Institute and Clinic, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, 381 I O’Hara Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15213,U.S.A. (Received 6 June 1984) Summary-Fifty-two socially-anxious and non-anxious individuals were assessed for indicators of physiological arousal, type of cognitions, and behavioral indicators of skill and anxiety within the context of a series of interpersonal tasks. These assessments included an unstructured interaction with an opposite-sex confederate. a similar interaction with a same-sex confederate and an impromptu speech. Results indicated that physiological reactivity occurred in most social situations in the socially anxious and to some extent in the non-socially anxious. An additional physiological index by which to differentiate the groups appeared to be latency to habituation. Socially-anxious individuals also have an increased number of negative cognitions and fewer positive cognitions. Situational factors appear to mediate the absolute level of reactivity. The results are discussed in terms of the assessment of the socially anxious, the role of physiological arousal, and the effect of situational context.

INTRODUCTION Social anxiety is a pervasive societal problem. Individuals with this condition report significant distress when interacting in social situations or performing in public. Several investigators (Schlenker and Leary, 1982; Watson and Friend. 1969; Zimbardo, 1977) have suggested this condition is characterized by heightened physiological arousal when in social situations, a fear of negative evaluation by others, a high likelihood of negative expectations regarding the ability to interact with others and, in some cases, deliberate avoidance of the threatening situations. The condition of social anxiety can extract a significant toll in terms of social functioning as well as vocational performance. Estimates of the prevalence of social anxiety suggest that between 20-41% of the population experience some degree of performance anxiety or discomfort in social situations. Many of these individuals experience discomfort to the extent that they avoid social interactions (Curran, 1977; Zimbardo, 1977). In addition, inability to make effective oral presentations may be reflected in lack of career advancement or mediocre academic performance. Those who experience difficulty in or avoid heterosocial interactions report feelings of frustration or loneliness (Maroldo, 1981: Zimbardo. 1977) and heterosexually-anxious individuals are less likely to date (Twentyman and McFall, 1975) or become involved in romantic and sexual encounters (Schlenker and Leary, 1982). It has also been suggested that socially-anxious individuals may abuse alcohol and/or other substances to alleviate their subjective distress (DSM-III, 1980; Pilkonis, Feldman and Himmelhoch, 1981). Thus. it would appear that the condition of social anxiety can have serious impact upon an individual’s functioning. As noted above. physiological arousal, negative cognitions and behavioral factors have all been suggested as being parameters of importance in social anxiety. However, it is unclear, as it is in other anxiety states. what role each plays with respect to etiology and/or maintenance. Experimental studies of these parameters in the socially anxious have been limited by S selection procedures, the majority of which have been restricted to heterosocially-anxious males, and neglect of the importance of assessment of reactivity in all three dimensions within the same individual. These limitations preclude full understanding of the emotional distress experienced by these individuals. Information with respect to physiological arousal is particularly meager. In one of the few extant studies. Borkovec. Stone. O’Brien. and Kaloupek (1974) found that heart rate was significantly higher in heterosocially-anxious males than non-heterosocially-anxious males during a 5 min social interaction. Similarly. elevated arousal was noted by Lang, Levin, Miller and Kozak (1983), who reported increased heart rate in speech phobics when delivering a speech. This study however. did not include a non-fearful control group. Particularly in a public-speaking situation, individuals 109

110

DEBORAH

C. BEIDEL

er d.

who do not report fear when in a performance situation might still demonstrate increased cardiac response. The discriminating factor might be that they do not experience concomitant cognitive distress or label this arousal as ‘anxiety’ as do the socially anxious. Thus. although suggestive, the role of physiological arousal in the etiology and maintenance of social anxiety remains unclear. It has been suggested that faulty cognitions may play a major role in the maintenance of social anxiety. Cognitive styles which have been implicated as differing in the socially anxious include irrational beliefs (Glass, Merluzzi, Biever and Larsen, 1982: Goldfried and Sobocinski. 1975: Sutton-Simon and Goldfried, 1979) negative self-statements and self-evaluation (Efran and Korn. 1969; Glasgow and Arkowitz, 1975) and negative attributions toward heterosocial interactions (Goldfried, Padawer and Robins, 1984). The findings of these studies are limited however by recent suggestions that the instruments used to measure these global cognitive styles lack external and discriminant validity and may be nothing more than a measure of general emotional distress (Smith. 1982). More empirical support can be generated for the role of negative self-statements. Glass er ~11. (1982) reported heterosocially-anxious males and females had fewer positive thoughts and more negative cognitions during heterosocial interaction than their non-anxious counterparts. Finally, the impact of an individual’s behavior in the etiology and maintenance of social anxiety is also unclear. Although not all socially-anxious individuals consistently avoid social-evaluative situations, the vast majority do report an inability to successfully interact in social encounters. Although this may be reflective ofa maladaptive cognitive style, others have interpreted this inability to interact as a social-skill deficit. Evidence to support the existence of social-skills deficits in the socially anxious has been based on observation of behavior in heterosocial interactions and is somewhat equivocal. Borkovec et al. (1974) reported highly-anxious males could be discriminated on a rating of social effectiveness and tended to speak less during a brief heterosocial interaction. Daley (1978) reported differences in the variables of eye contact and frequency of response. but not subjective quality of the performance. This might suggest that the repertoire of the socially anxious is not extremely inadequate. but high levels of arousal interfere with the performance. Halford and Foddy (1982) reported differences in cognitions and assertiveness between socially-anxious and non-anxious Ss during a series of 20-set role-play tasks. The anxious group had more negative thoughts during the role-play and were rated less assertive. Conversely. other studies which investigated gaze, response latency, head nods, gestures response duration and frequency of response (Glasgow and Arkowitz, 197.5; Rehm and Marston. 1968) failed to determine any significant differences in behavioral skill between highly-socially-anxious and non-anxious groups. Pilkonis (1977) noted socially-anxious males had poorer eye contact while females tended to smile less. Failure to determine differences in the behavioral repertoire may be associated with any number of reasons. not the least of which might be that the hypothesized differences do not exist. However, the use of strictly heterosocial interactions and selection of molecular behaviors, such as gestures. by which to evaluate skill may also be.contributory factors in the inability to detect behavioral differences. To summarize, complete understanding of the emotional distress experienced by the socially anxious has been hampered in several ways. First. there has been no research effort to simultaneously assess behavioral, cognitive and physiological reactivity manifested by a socially-anxious individual wheninagiven social situation. Inasmuch as these parametersdo not necessarily covary (Lang. 1968). this type of simultaneous assessment would appear to be necessary for a more complete understanding of the condition. Secondly, the majority of studies of social anxiety have examined the responses with opposite-sex partners. of heterosocially-anxious individuals, mainly males. interacting Although these data are important, they do not represent the range of social or performance situations in which an individual may experience social anxiety. Given the importance of situational factors in behavioral assessment (Mischel, 1968). a multisituational approach would appear to be appropriate. This study was an attempt to address these two criticisms. Specifically. the purpose of this project was to investigate physiological reactivity, cognition and behavioral performance in socially-anxious and non-anxious individuals across several different social contexts. METHOD Suhircrs Twenty-six Ss, 13 males and 13 females. who scored above the established cutoff scores indicative of clinical levels of anxiety on each measure of a screening battery (see below) comprised the socially-

Social

anxiety

III

anxious (SA) group. Similarly, 26 Ss, 13 males and 13 females, who scored below the cutoff scores on this same battery made up the non-socially-anxious (NSA) group. Mean scores on the screening battery are listed in Table 1. As indicated by these scores, the level of social anxiety reported by individuals in the SA group represented a clinically significant problem. In addition, the SA Ss did not manifest any other anxiety disorder such as agoraphobia, but reported experiencing distress across a range of interpersonal situations, including interactions with authority figures, family members and strangers. The individuals ranged in age from 18 to 41 yr. The groups were equivalent with regard to age and race. TableI. Mean

scores

for both

groups

SA proup

on the screening NSA

group

batter!

f

S.4D

14.2

4.8

9.70”’

FNE STAI

72.2

8.1

12.71***

46.5 41.5

34.8 33.3

5.s3*** 2.75**

Trait

subscale

State

subscale

**P<0.01;***P<0.001.

Screening Battery The screening battery was comprised of three inventories: The Social Avoidance and Distress Scale (SAD; Watson and Friend, 1969), the Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale (FNE; Watson and Friend, 1969) and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI; Spielberger, Gorsuch and Lushene, 1970). Additionally. the Ss completed the Agoraphobia subscale of the Fear Survey Schedule (FSS; Wolpe and Lang, 1964) to rule out agoraphobia. Mean scores on the test battery for each group are listed in Table 1. Assessment of Social Anxiety Each S participated in an extended assessment designed to measure various parameters of social anxiety. A series of behavioral tasks were presented to the S and included: (a) an unstructured interpersonal interaction with an opposite-sex confederate; (b) a similar interaction with a same-sex confederate; and (c) an impromptu talk with a topic selected by the S. During this procedure, level of physiological arousal, type of cognitions, and behavioral manifestations of skill and anxiety were monitored. Additionally, Ss reported their level of anxiety and estimate of skill after completion of each task. Physiological Reactivity Physiological reactivity in each situation was monitored continuously throughout participation in the behavioral tasks. Three channels were assessed: heart rate (HR), as indicated by interbeat interval (IBI), systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP). IBI was measured with a Bio-Med Associates polygraph. Three Ag-AgCl electrodes were placed on the Ss chest to assess variations in IBI. Blood pressure was measured by an Arteriosonde automatic blood pressure recording device. SBP and DBP were recorded at 2-min intervals throughout the assessment procedure. Blood pressure was recorded at the following intervals: resting baseline. at 1,3,5,7 and 9 min; Role-play No. 1. at 1 and 3 min; Role-play No. 2, 1 and 3 min; speech. at 1 and 3 min. Cognitive Assessment Upon completion of each behavioral task, the S completed the Social Interaction Self-Statement Test (SISST; Glass er al.. 1982). This is a 30-item inventory which lists a variety of thoughts that an individual may experience during a social interaction, The statements are rated using a 5-point scale by which the S indicates how often he had that particular thought during the just completed interaction. The scale is anchored such that a rating of 1 indicates ‘not at all’ and 5 indicates ‘very often’. Glass er al. (1982) report the scale is appropriate for use in assessing cognitions in opposite- and same-sex interactions. Although the scale was originally designed for heterosocial encounters, substitution of plural pronouns for singular pronouns enables the scale to be used for a variety of social situations.

112

DEBORAH C. BEIDEL orhi

Behavioral

Assessnrrnt

The s’s performance during each of the three tasks was videotaped and rated by independent raters blind to group assignment. The behaviors were rated on 5-point qualitative scales developed bl Trower, Bryant and Argyle (1978) and included intonation, speech loudness, gaze and overall skill. The scales were anchored with a rating of 1 indicating extremely inadequate skill on that particular variable and 5 indicating high level ofability. Anxiety was rated along a 9-point scale with 1 reflective of a feeling of complete calm. 5 indicating moderate anxiety and 9 indicating extreme anxiety. Additionally, response duration was timed for each interaction and speech dysfluencies were counted. The scales used in this study have been used extensively in previous assessments of social skill (Beidel, Bellack. Turner, Hersen, and Luber, 1981). Twenty-five percent of the tapes were independently rated by a second judge to allow for calculation of interrater reliability.

Self-report

Ratings

At the completion of each task. Ss rated their perceived level of skill on a 5-point Likert scale. with 1 indicating very unskilled and 5 indicating very skilled. In addition, the S rated level of state anxiety after completion of the task. using a 9-point fear thermometer with 1 indicating complete calm. and 4 indicating a feeling of extreme anxiety. These scales were identical to those used by the independent judges. Procedure Baseline

physiological

assessment

Prior to presentation of the behavioral tasks, the s’s baseline level of physiological arousal was assessed during a lo-min resting period. Electrodes were attached by the same-sex confederate. After all the physiological monitoring equipment was attached, the S was requested to rest quietly for 10 min while baseline levels were monitored. Blood pressure readings were taken after the first minute of baseline and at 2-min intervals thereafter. Heart rate was monitored continuously throughout the assessment. Following this period, the three behavioral tasks were presented.These included a 3-min opposite-sex role-play interaction, a similar same-sex interaction and a 5-min speech. Order of the first two tasks was counterbalanced within each group. After each task, the individual completed the cognitive assessment and the self-report evaluations. Presentation of the second task was withheld until physiological arousal levels returned to baseline. The impromptu speech was always presented la-st as it was expected to produce the highest level of arousal which would not as readily return to baseline. Role-play

interactions

During the two role-play tasks, the S was instructed to act as if the situation were actuall> occurring. Each situation required the S to interact with a confederate who was seated in the same room, facing the S. Confederates were trained to remain neutral during the interaction. thus leaving the burden of conversation maintenance to the S. The confederates had no specific prompts and were instructed to respond to the S, but not to ask questions during the interaction. Confederates were monitored by the first author throughout the project to assure adherence to these instrLlctions, Scenarios were presented to the S by the experimenter. The heterosocial scene required the S to imagine a first date with the confederate, where they were seated in a restaurant waiting for a food order to be served. For the same-sex task, the S was asked to imagine that the confederate was a new college roommate. After presentation of the scene. the S was instructed to begin the interaction. Each interaction lasted 3 min. Impromptu

speech

For the final task, the S was asked to make an impromptu speech upon a self-selected topic, with the confederates and experimenter serving as the audience. Prior to beginning. the S was given a 3-min period in which to determine a topic and prepare for the presentation. The f then delivered a 5-min impromptu speech.

113

Social anxiety

RESULTS

Analjq.sisqf Baseline PhJkological Recordings To allow for comparability with other investigations. IBI was converted to HR by the formula HR = 60/IBI. Baseline values for each physiological channel were calculated as the mean of the last three readings during the IO-min baseline period (at 5. 7 and 9 min). Difference scores were calculated as follows: for SBP, DBP and HR; change in level during task = level during task - baseline value. Thus, for these three channels, positive change scores would indicate increases in reactivity. Change scores were calculated at each measurement point within each interaction. Thus, there were two change scores available for each task. The mean change score for each group at each time period is displayed in Table 2. Anal_mis qf D~~~rencr.sin Ph~~siological, Cognitive, Behavioral and Seljkeport Measures Between SA and NSA Groups For the behavioral. cognitive and self-report variables, with the exception of speech dysfluencies, data were analyzed using a 2 (group) x 2 (sex) ANOVA. A x’ analysis was used to determine differences in a number of speech dysfluencies. Initially, a repeated measures 2 (group) x 2 (sex) ANOVA was employed for the analysis of the difference scores for the physioiogical recordings. As there were no effects for sex. this factor was dropped from subsequent analyses. The physiological measures were analyzed with a one-way repeated-measures ANOVA. For the behavioral ratings, Pearson product-moment correlations between raters were as follows: gaze, 0.94; volume, 0.82; tone. 0.83; overall skill, 0.74; overall anxiety, 0.77. Physiological Measures The SA group demonstrated significant increases in physiological reactivity when compared to the NSA group, during two of the three behavioral tasks (see Table 3). For the opposite-sex interaction, there were significant differences between the groups for both SBP and HR measures. There was a main effect for group on SBP, with the SA group recording significantly larger increases in SBP levels than the NSA group [F(l, 50) = 5.18, P
Tash Oppostte-sex Klle-pla! Same-sex role-p1a> Speech

I 3

I 3

I 3

DBP (mmHg)

SBP (mmHgt SA -~-_____26.9 22.7 18.2 16.3 27.5 29.8

____NSA 14.9* 17.2 14.5 14.3 22.1* I8.6*

-- SA __18.1 16.6 13.7 12.8 16.7 17.1

HR Chpm) ;A-

NSA~-.15.3 14.4 10.3 11.7 17.2 15.5

NSA 6.5 3.8 2.6 2.2 6.6 5.7

2.3* 2.8 1.8 1.4 5.3 3.7

*Values gwen in the table are change sccres calculated as described in text Positive values are indtcative of increasing levels of reactivity. *P < 0.05. Table 3. Dtfferences in physmlogical reactivity in the SA and NSA grooup~ Mean SA group Oppcwte-sex task .t1arr1 rqjkr SBP

SBP inrrracr1on: SBP at I min SBP ar 3 min

BR1 23:2-B

Mean NSA pip

dt’

F

P

-

24.79

17.05

1.50

5.18

0.025

6.56

2.30

1.50

3.94

0.05

28.63

20.36

1.50

7.65

0.01

27.48 29.79

22.15 18.57

1.50

4.45

0.05

DEBORAH C. BEIDEL zr rri

114

significant time x group interaction for WR [F( 1. SO)= 3.94, P < O.OS]. An F-test for simple effects indicated the increased HR in the SA group at I min (6.6 bpm) was significantly higher than heart rate at 3 min (3.8 bpm) and significantly higher than either HR increase in the NSA group (2.3 and 2.8bpm, respectively). There was no significant differences for change in DBP during the oppositesex interaction. There was also a main effect for group on SBP during the impromptu speech. with the SA group demonstrating significantly higher elevations [F( 1. 50) = 7.65. P < 0.011. Additionally, there was a time x group interaction for this variable. The F-test for simple effects indicated SBP in the NSA group at 3 min was significantly lower (P -=c0.05) than SBP at the 1 min assessment point. Moreover. it was significantly lower than either increase in the SA group. There were no differences in DBP or HR during the impromptu speech. Finally, the groups did not differ on any of the physiological variables during the same-sex interaction. Cognitiw

Measures

Differences between the groups for both the positive and negative subscales of the SISST were identical across all three social situations (see Table 4). In each case the SA group had significantly fewer positive thoughts [opposite-sex interaction F( 1, 48) = 3 1.02, P < 0.001; same sex interaction, F( 1,48) = 15.99, P-c 0.001; impromptu speech, F( 1,48) = 22.18, P < O.OOl]and a greater number of negative thoughts [opposite-sex interaction, F( 1, 48) = 25.62, P-c 0,001; same-sex interaction, F( i, 48) = 30.65, P-cO.001; impromptu speech, F(1,48) = 19.18, P-c O.OOl].

Across all the molecular behaviors, the only significant finding was a group x sex interaction for appropriate gaze during the two unstructured role-plays (see Table 5). During the opposite-sex interaction [F(l, 48) = 6.36, P qO.0251, post hoc analysis using the F-test for simple effects indicated the SA males had significantly lower ratings ofappropriate gaze (x = 3.69) than either the SA females (x = 4.46), the NSA males (x = 4.69) or the NSA females (x = 4.50, P < 0.05). For the same-sex roleplay, there was again a group x sex interaction for rating of appropriate gaze [F( 1, 48) = 4.91, PcO.051. Results of the F-test for simple effects indicated the rating of gaze for the SA males (x = 3.82) was significantly different at the0.05 level from the rating of gaze for NSA males (X = 4.61) or SA females (2 = 4.53), but not different from that of NSA females (2 = 4.38). For ratings of overall skill and anxiety, several differences between the groups were noted. There was a main effect for group on the variable of overall skill during the opposite-sex interaction [F( 1,48)=6.00, P < 0.0253. The SA group was perceived to be less skillful during the interaction than the NSA group (x = 3.9 vs 3.2). In addition, the rating of perceived level of anxiety suggested the NSA group was observed to be significantly less anxious (x = 4.2 vs 5.0. P-cO.07). although the difference did not reach the 0.05 level. During the same-sex interaction. the independent observers rated the NSA group as more skillful (&= 3.19 vs 3.14, P< 0.07). Ratings of anxiety and skill during the impromptu speech approached significance, with the NSA group being rated as less anxious (x= 3.9 vs 4.6, P < 0.08) and more skilled (x= 4.2 vs 3.7). Table 4. Differences

m cognition

Mean SA group

Posttwc thoughts Negatwc thoughts Same-sex task Murr1 cf/<,cr. Posltlve thoughts Negative thoughts Impromptu speech Main

rtferr'

Positwe thoughts Negatwr thoughts

m thr SA and NSA groups Mean

NSA group


49.19

51.39 35 46

I,.a

3 I .O? 25.62

o.no

43.56 46.36

52.00 31 54

I .JH 1.4X

15.99 30.65

O.(x)I 0.00 I

41.27

1.48

F

P

i).DO I I

Social anxiety

115

Table 5. Differences m behavior in the SA and NSA groups Mean SA group

MeaIl NSA group

3.19

3.89

3.69 4.46

3.82 4.53

F

P

1.48

6.00

0.025

4.69 4.50

1.48

6.36

0.025

4.61 4.38

1.48

4.9 I

0.0s

d/

Table 6. Differences in sell-esttmates of skill and anxiety in the SA and NSA groups

Opposite-sex task Muir &kr: Self-report of anxiq Self-report of skill Same-sextask Moin &Cl : Self-report of anxiet!

Self-report 0r anxiet!

Mean SA group

Mean NSA group

5.77 2.65

4.35 3.19

1.48 I.48

12.64 4.86

0.001 0.05

4.89

3.89

I.48

13.00

0.00 I

5.58

4.00

1.48

9.63

0.02

df

F

P

Self-report Measures

During each of the three behavioral tasks the SA group rated themselves as more anxious than their NSA counterparts [opposite-sex interaction, F( 1,48) = 12.64, P < 0.001; same-sex interaction, F( 1,48) = 13.00. P < 0.001; impromptu speech, F( 1, 48) = 9.36, P < 0.011. There were differences in estimated level of skill only during the opposite sex interaction where the SA group perceived themselves to be significantly less skillful [F( 1, 48) = 4.86, P < 0.051 (see Table 6). DISCUSSION It

is evident from the above analyses that socially-anxious individuals manifest differences in level of physiological reactivity, type of cognitions and behavioral skill, as well as perceived level of social skill and anxiety. These differences were evident across several social-evaluative situations although. perhaps more important, the magnitude of the reactivity was mediated by the specific task. Within this particular study, the salient tasks were the speech and opposite-sex interactions. On the latter two tasks, there were significant differences in both reactivity and habituation to task demands between the NSA and SA groups. This indicates that the socially anxious fail to habituate during social encounters and this could well explain the continued presence of subjective distress. With respect to future assessment of this condition, latency to habituation would be an important variable to measure. The fact that interaction in the same-sex task did not elicit significant differences between the groups in arousa1 is an indication that social anxiety is to some extent situationally specific. Therefore, in future studies, individualized tasks will be necessary. For all situations, there were differences in the type of thoughts experienced by the two groups. In each case. the SA group reported significantly fewer positive thoughts. These positive thoughts, common in the NSA group, could be characterized as coping statements. Additionally, the NSA group had more thoughts which attributed any awkward behavior to the situation rather than to themselves. Cognitions in the socially anxious were more likely to be characterized as negative, and were considered to be related to lack of skill. Furthermore, the SA group attributed the perceived failure of the social interaction to their lack of interpersonal skill Thus, as in previous studies of cognitions in socially-anxious males (Geist and Borecki, 1982; Girodo, Dotzenroth and Stein, 1981: Glass ef al., 19X2), there is evidence of perceived inability to cope, negative evaluatory

DEBORAH C. BEIDEL t’t [I/

116

cognitions, experienced

and the absence of coping during social encounters.

thoughts,

all of which

could

contribute

to the distress

With respect to the behavioral dimension, there was some evidence that the SA group was less skillful, although differences were dependent upon whether molecular behaviors or global ratings of skill constituted the unit of measurement. Although there was little evidence of behavioral deficits at the molecular level. group differences were apparent when a global rating of overall effectiveness was employed. In each situation, there were differences in ratings of skill that were significant or clearly approaching significance, suggesting there was some factor in the s’s performance to which the raters were reacting when judging level of skill on a global basis. Although individual behavior such as eye contact or voice tone was an insufficient measure by which to discriminate the groups. the synergistic combination of all the molecular variables appeared potent enough to create an impression of unskillfulness in the socially anxious. Alternatively. if behavioral performance is evaluated differences were noted only during the opposite-sex individuals are concerned that their distress may be perceived by the SA group was not always apparent to

for indicators of anxiety rather than skill. scenario. Thus. although socially-anxious evident to others. the heightened distress the independent raters.

Finally, across all three tasks. the SA group rated themselves as more anxious during the interactions than the NSA group. despite similar increases in physiological arousal during the speech. and the lack of reactivity in either group during the same-sex interaction. The higher rating by the SA group may indicate heightened sensitivity to physiological arousal or a tendency on the part of the NSA group to downplay the importance of these reactions. One variable not directly measured in this investigation. but one that may have influenced the self-estimates of skill and anxiety. was the behavior of the confederate in the role-play task. A recent study has indicated that behavior of the confederate is important (Conger and Conger, 1982). Recalling the suggestion that socially-anxious Ss attributed failure of social interaction to their own behavior whereas non-socially-anxious Ss did not (Glass et al.. 1982). the instructions to the confederate provided ample opportunity for the socially-anxious individual to view the confederate as unresponsive or aloof. In turn. this may have contributed to the lowered estimate of skill. Subsequent research might vary the confederate’s behavior to assess the impact on self-ratings of anxiety and skill There are some limitations to this study. First. the situations used in this project represent a broader range of social interactions than in any previous research study. but do not sample the complete range of social-evaluative interactions. Secondly, the physiological assessment was limited to cardiac arousal indices. Other measures, such as respiration rate or GSR were not included. Thus. although all three factors appear to be important aspects of the social-anxiety condition. the seemingly paramount nature of the positive and negative cognitions might hold some implications for treatment. Specifically, it might be hypothesized that therapies which deal with cognitions directly, such as cognitive restructuring or self-efficacy training, might be more efficacious than those which would affect thoughts indirectly. such as social-skills or relaxation training. However. this remains to be demonstrated. In summary. the purpose of this investigation was to determine if level of physiological arousal. type of cognition and behavioral performance in social situations differed in the SA and NSA groups. An additional purpose was to determine whether these differences were consistent across a range of interpersonal situations. The results indicated that the socially anxious do demonstrate a higher level of physiological arousal. report far more negative evaluatory and fewer positive coping cognitions, and are perceived as less skillful by independent evaluators. Situational factors however. appear to mediate the experienced arousal such that in some instances. such as interactions with a same-sex confederate, socially-anxious individuals were on a par with their non-sociallyanxious peers. Therefore. a comprehensive assessment of social anxiety would necessitate measurement of all three response systems across a broad range of social situations.

,~cltno,uled~rmmf.s-This research is based in part on a Masters Thesis conducted by the tirst author under the directlon the second author. Thanks are expressed to Steven Manuck and Scott Monroe who served as committee members.

of

Social anxiety

117

REFERENCES Beidel D. C.. Bellach A. S.. Turner S. M.. Hersen M. and Luhcr R. F. (19801 Social skills training for chronic psychiatric patients: a treatment manual. JS.4S Car. .scl. Docurti. /?s>~chol. Il. 36. Blanchard E.. Kolb L. C.. Pallmeyer D. and Gerardi S. (1982) Assessment of post traumatic stress disorder. Unpublished manuscript. SUNY at Albany. N.Y. Borkovec T. D.. Stone N. M.. O’Brten G. T. and Kaloupek D. G. (1974) Evaluation of a clinically relevant target behavior for analog outcome research. B&r. Thcr. 5. 5033513. Conger J. C. and Conger A. J. (1982) Components of heterosocial competence. In Social Con~petcwcc~ und Psychrurric Disorder-.\: Theory. and Practice (Edited by Curran J. P. and Monti P.). Guilford Press. New York. Curran J. P. (1977) Skills tratning as an approach to the treatment of heterosexual social anxiety: a review. Pspchol. Bull. 84,14&157. Dale! S. (1978) Behavioural correlates of social anxiety. Br. J. .soc. c/in. Psycho/. 17, 117~120. DSM-III (1980) Diuqmstic untl Srurisricul Manual qfMenra/ Disorders. 3rd edn. APA. Washington. D.C. Efran J. S. and Korn P. R. (1969) Measurement of social caution: self-appraisal. role-playing and discussion behavior. J. consulr. c/in. PswhoL 33, 78883. Fremouw W. J.. Gross R.. Monroe J. and Rapp S. (1982) Empirical subtypes of performance anxiety. Behurl A.s.~~.s.s.4, 179193. Geist C. R. and Borecki S. (1982) Social avoidance and distress as a predictor of perceived locus of control and level of selfesteem. J. c/in. Psj&~o/. 38, 6 I l-6 13. Girodo M.. Dotzenroth S. E. and Stein S. J. (1981) Casual attribution bias in shy males: implications [or self-esteem and selfconfidence. Co!/. Thrr. Res. 5. 325-338. Glasgow R. E. and Arkowitz H. (1975) The behavioral assessment of male and female social competence in dyadic interactions. Brhac. Ther. 6. 488-498. Glass C. R. Merluzzi T. V.. Biever J. L. and Larsen K. H. (1982) Cognitive assessment of social anxiety: development and validation of a self-statement questionnaire. Coy. Thrr. Re.5. 6, 37-55. Goldfried M. R. and Sobocinski D. (1975) Etrects of irrational beliefs on emotional arousal. J. consult. c/in. Psvchol. 43, 504510. Goldfried M. R.. Padawer W. and Robins C. (1984) Social anxiety and the semantic structure of heterosocial interactions. J. uhnorr,~. Psw-1101.93, 87-97. Halford K. and Foddy M. (1982) Cognitive and social skills correlates of social anxiety. Br. J. c/in. Psgchol. 21, 17-28. Lang P. J. (1968) Fear reduction and fear behavior: problems in treating a construct. In Research in Psychotherapy,. Vol. 3 (Edited by Shlien J. M.J. APA. Washington. D.C. Lang P. J.. Levin D. N.. Miller G. A. and Kozak M. (1983) Fear behavior. fear imagery. and the psychophysiology of emotion: the problem of affective response integration. J. ahnorm. Ps.vchcl. 92, 276-306. Maroldo G. K. (19811 Shyness and loneliness among college men and women. Psychol. Rep. 48, 885-886. Mischel W. (1968) Persanalirj~ and Assessmenr. Wiley, New York. Pilkonis P. A. (1977) Shyness. public and private. and its relationship to other measures of soctal behavior. J. Person. 45. 585-595. Pilkonis P. A.. Feldman H. and Himmelhoch J. (1981) Social anxiety and substance abuse in the affective disorders. Compreh. Psvchiar. 22, 451-457. Rehm L. P. and Marston A. R. (1968) Reduction of social anxiety through modification of self-reinforcement: an instigation therapy technique. J. consult. clin. Ps!*cho/. 32, 565-574. Schlenker B. E. and Lear! M. R. (1982) Social anxiety and self-presentation: a conceptualization and model. Psycho/. Bull. 92. 641-649. Smith T. W:. (1982) Irrational beliefs in the cause and treatment of emotional distress: a critical review of the rationalemotive model. Clirt. Pswhol. RN. 2, 505-522. Smye M. D. and Wine J. D. (1980) A comparison of female and male adolescents social behaviors and cognitions: a challenge to the assertiveness literature. Ses Roks 6, 2 13-230. Spielberger C. D.. Gorsuch R. L. and Lushene R. E. (1970) The Start-Trair Anxieq Inuenror~~: Test Manual,for Form X. Consulting Psychologists Press. Palo Alto. Calif. Sutton-Simon K. and Goldfried M. R. (1979) Faulty thinking patterns in two types of anxiety. Coy. Thrr. Res. 3, 193-203. Trower P.. Bryant B. and Argyle M. (1978) Social Skills and Menrul Health. Univ. of Pittsburgh Press. Pittsburgh, Penn. Twentyman C. T. and McFall R. M. (1975) Behavioral training of social skills in shy males. J. consult. clin. Ps,vchol. 43, 384395. Watson D. and Friend R. (1969) Measurement of social-evaluative anxiety. J. consult. c/in. Psj,chol. 33, 438-447. Wolpe J. and Lang P. (1964) Fear Survey Schedule for use in behavior therapy. Brhar. Res. Ther. 2, 27-30. Zimbardo P. G. (19771 .S/I~XC~.SS: U’har It Is. Whar To Do About Ir. Addison-Wesley. Reading. Mass.