Search

Background: Within maintenance models of social anxiety disorder (SAD), a number of cognitive and behavioural factors that drive the persistence of SAD have been proposed. However, these maintenance models do not address how SAD develops, or the origins of the proposed maintaining factors. There are also models of the development of SAD that have been proposed independently from maintenance models. These models highlight multiple factors that contribute risk to the onset of SAD, but do not address how these aetiological factors may lead to the development of the maintaining factors associated with SAD.Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify aetiological and maintenance models of SAD. We then united key factors identified in these models and formulated an integrated aetiological and maintenance (IAM) model of SAD. A systematic review of the literature was then conducted on the components of the IAM model.Results: A number of aetiological and maintaining factors were identified in models of SAD. These factors could be drawn together into the IAM model. On balance, there is empirical evidence for the association of each of the factors in the IAM model with social anxiety or SAD, providing preliminary support for the model.Limitations: There are relationships between components of the IAM model that require empirical attention. Future research will need to continue to test the IAM model.Conclusions: The IAM model provides a framework for future investigations into the development and persistence of SAD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We examined whether providing three sessions of treatment based on motivational interviewing (MI) prior to Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) for Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD) improved outcomes.Methods: Participants diagnosed with SAD (N = 186) were randomly allocated to receive three sessions of MI (MI+CBT; n = 85) or supportive counselling (SC+CBT; n = 101) prior to a 12-week group CBT program. Assessments occurred at baseline, after preparatory treatment, after CBT, and at 6-months follow-up. Outcomes were expectations for change, number of CBT sessions attended, self- and clinician-rated CBT homework completion, and self- and clinician-rated social anxiety severity.Results: Conditions did not differ significantly on expectations for change, number of CBT sessions attended, or clinician-rated homework completion. Self-rated homework completion was greater in MI+CBT than in SC+CBT. Change over time in social anxiety severity did not differ between conditions overall, however, this outcome was significantly moderated by two variables; those in MI+CBT, as compared to SC+CBT, showed significantly poorer outcomes on self-reported social anxiety severity if they were higher in change readiness and significantly better outcomes on clinician-rated social anxiety severity if they were higher in functional impairment.Limitations: Although therapists in MI sessions were rated as behaving more consistently with MI than therapists in SC sessions, some MI consistent behaviors occurred in the SC sessions.Conclusions: Addition of a MI-based discussion prior to evidence-based CBT appears to benefit people with SAD who have high functional impairment but may interfere with outcomes for those higher in readiness for change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cultural factors influence both the expression of social anxiety and the interpretation and functioning of social anxiety measures. This study aimed to test the measurement equivalence of two commonly used social anxiety measures across two sociocultural contexts using individuals with social anxiety disorder (SAD) from Australia and Japan.Methods: Scores on the straightforwardly-worded Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (S-SIAS) and the Social Phobia Scale (SPS) from two archival datasets of individual with SAD, one from Australia (n = 201) and one from Japan (n = 295), were analysed for measurement equivalence using a multigroup confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) framework.Results: The best-fitting factor models for the S-SIAS and SPS were not found to be measurement equivalent across the Australian and Japanese samples. Instead, only a subset of items was invariant. When this subset of invariant items was used to compare social anxiety symptoms across the Australian and Japanese samples, Japanese participants reported lower levels of fear of attracting attention, and similar levels of fear of overt evaluation, and social interaction anxiety, relative to Australian participants.Limitations: We only analysed the measurement equivalence of two social anxiety measures using a specific operationalisation of culture. Future studies will need to examine the measurement equivalence of other measures of social anxiety across other operationalisations of culture.Conclusions: When comparing social anxiety symptoms across Australian and Japanese cultures, only scores from measurement equivalent items of social anxiety measures should be used. Our study highlights the importance of culturally-informed assessment in SAD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Prominent cognitive models of social anxiety have consistently emphasised the importance of beliefs about the self in the aetiology and maintenance of social anxiety. The present study sought to develop and validate a new measure of core beliefs about the self for SAD, the Core Beliefs Questionnaire (CBQ).Methods: Three versions of the CBQ were developed: a Trait version (fundamental absolute statements about the self), a Contingent version (statements about the self related to a specific social-evaluative situation), and an Other version (statements about how others view the self in social-evaluative situations generally). The psychometric features of the scales were examined in clinical (n=269) and non-clinical (n=67) samples.Results: Exploratory factor analysis yielded a one factor model for all three versions of the questionnaire. Total scores differentiated individuals with SAD from individuals without a psychiatric condition, and demonstrated excellent internal consistency. The three CBQ versions had positive associations with social anxiety while controlling for depression, although zero-order correlations indicated the Trait version was more strongly related to depression than social anxiety, the Contingent version was similarly related to depression and social anxiety, and the Other version was more strongly related to social anxiety than depression. Scores on all three versions of the CBQ reduced from pre- to post-treatment and this change predicted treatment outcome.Limitations: This is the first validation study of the CBQ.Conclusions: This study provides initial support for the reliability and validity of the CBQ. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]