CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 22Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychological Treatments and AssessmentsChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Post-event processing in social anxiety disorder after real-life social situations – An ambulatory assessment study

Helbig-Lang, Sylvia, von Auer, Maxie, Neubauer, Karolin, Murray, Eileen, Gerlach, Alexander L.·2016·Behaviour Research and Therapy
DOI 10.1016/j.brat.2016.07.003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Excessive post-mortem processing after social situations, a core symptom of social anxiety disorder (SAD), is thought to contribute to the perpetuation of social anxiety by consolidating negative self-schemata. Empirical findings on actual mechanisms underlying this so-called Post-Event Processing (PEP) are still scarce. The present study sought to identify variables associated with the experience of PEP after real-life social situations in a sample of 49 individuals diagnosed with SAD. Using an ambulatory assessment approach, individuals were asked to report on each distressing social event experienced during one week. A total of 192 events were captured. Hierarchical linear modeling indicated that next to trait social anxiety, the type of social situation (performance vs. interaction situations), self-focused attention, safety behavior use, and negative affect predicted levels of PEP after social situations. These findings add to the growing literature that emphasizes the importance of situational factors for the experience of PEP, and highlight potential venues to prevent it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.brat.2016.07.003

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Some studies included a mix of random prompt, event-contingent, and end-of-day records.

    “studies such as those by Daniel et al [24], Helbig-Lang et [46], and Kashdan et al [20] included a mix of different types of data collection, combining random prompt, event-contingent, and end-of-day records.”

    From Studies of Social Anxiety Using Ambulatory Assessment: Systematic Review (2024) · cites this paper as [46]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Helbig-Lang, S., von Auer, M., Neubauer, K., Murray, E., & Gerlach, A. L.
Affiliations
University of Cologne (DE)
ORCID
Gerlach, Alexander L.
Venue
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-09
Volume
84
Pages
27-34
ISSN
0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.brat.2016.07.003
OpenAlex
W2473233924
Cited by
22
References
44
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5
FWCI
3.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Kölner Universitäts PublikationsServer (Universität zu Köln) (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Bremen (ZF 11/137/10)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
social anxiety disorder, post-event processing, ambulatory assessment, trait social anxiety, performance situations, interaction situations, self-focus, safety behavior, negative affect, self-schemata, situational factors
MeSH terms
Attentional Bias, Phobia, Social, Adolescent, Adult, Affect, Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Social Behavior, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review