Effect of Social Anxiety on Construal Level and Satisfaction for Central (vs. Peripheral) Attribute

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. 77-95
Author(s):  
Jin yong Ko ◽  
Jun Sang Yeo
2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (10) ◽  
pp. 3349-3363
Author(s):  
Naomi H. Rodgers ◽  
Jennifer Y. F. Lau ◽  
Patricia M. Zebrowski

Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine group and individual differences in attentional bias toward and away from socially threatening facial stimuli among adolescents who stutter and age- and sex-matched typically fluent controls. Method Participants included 86 adolescents (43 stuttering, 43 controls) ranging in age from 13 to 19 years. They completed a computerized dot-probe task, which was modified to allow for separate measurement of attentional engagement with and attentional disengagement from facial stimuli (angry, fearful, neutral expressions). Their response time on this task was the dependent variable. Participants also completed the Social Anxiety Scale for Adolescents (SAS-A) and provided a speech sample for analysis of stuttering-like behaviors. Results The adolescents who stutter were more likely to engage quickly with threatening faces than to maintain attention on neutral faces, and they were also more likely to disengage quickly from threatening faces than to maintain attention on those faces. The typically fluent controls did not show any attentional preference for the threatening faces over the neutral faces in either the engagement or disengagement conditions. The two groups demonstrated equivalent levels of social anxiety that were both, on average, very close to the clinical cutoff score for high social anxiety, although degree of social anxiety did not influence performance in either condition. Stuttering severity did not influence performance among the adolescents who stutter. Conclusion This study provides preliminary evidence for a vigilance–avoidance pattern of attentional allocation to threatening social stimuli among adolescents who stutter.


2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 367-375 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura D. Seligman ◽  
Erin F. Swedish ◽  
Jason P. Rose ◽  
Jessica M. Baker

Abstract. The current study examined the validity of two self-report measures of social anxiety constructed using social comparative referent points. It was hypothesized that these comparison measures would be both reliable and valid. Results indicated that two different comparative versions – one invoking injunctive norms and another invoking descriptive norms – showed good reliability, excellent internal consistency, and acceptable convergent and discriminant validity. The comparative measures also predicted positive functioning, some aspects of social quality of life, and social anxiety as measured by an independent self-report. These findings suggest that adding a comparative reference point to instructions on social anxiety measures may aid in the assessment of social anxiety.


2014 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 223-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iris L. Žeželj ◽  
Biljana R. Jokić

Eyal, Liberman, and Trope (2008) established that people judged moral transgressions more harshly and virtuous acts more positively when the acts were psychologically distant than close. In a series of conceptual and direct replications, Gong and Medin (2012) came to the opposite conclusion. Attempting to resolve these inconsistencies, we conducted four high-powered replication studies in which we varied temporal distance (Studies 1 and 3), social distance (Study 2) or construal level (Study 4), and registered their impact on moral judgment. We found no systematic effect of temporal distance, the effect of social distance consistent with Eyal et al., and the reversed effect of direct construal level manipulation, consistent with Gong and Medin. Possible explanations for the incompatible results are discussed.


PsycCRITIQUES ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 53 (30) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan G. Hofmann

PsycCRITIQUES ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 53 (23) ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan H. Houston

Emotion ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 1012-1022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrei C. Miu ◽  
Romana Vulturar ◽  
Adina Chiş ◽  
Loredana Ungureanu ◽  
James J. Gross

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document