Fear of negative and positive evaluation and reactivity to social-evaluative videos in social anxiety disorder
Abstract
Social anxiety disorder (SAD) is marked by persistent fear of being scrutinized by others. This and most diagnostic symptoms relate to some form of fear of negative evaluation (FNE). More recent accounts of SAD, such as the Bivalent Fear of Evaluation Model, however, complement FNE with fear of positive evaluation (FPE), described as distress and avoidance of positive feedback. An explicit test of the incremental validity of FPE in discriminating SAD patients from controls - over and on top of the explanatory power of FPE - is currently missing and generally, well controlled laboratory experiments with positive and negative social stimuli in this patient group are rare. To fill this gap, we exposed 35 patients with SAD and healthy controls (HCs) to short social-evaluative video clips with actors expressing negative and positive as well as neutral statements while recording reactivity on experiential measures (valence, arousal, and approval ratings) as well as on facial electromyography and electrocardiography. In addition, participants completed questionnaire measures of FNE and FPE. Results revealed that FPE questionnaire scores as well as experiential (valence and appreciation) and electromyographical reactivity measures to positive videos improved prediction of group membership beyond the predictive power of FNE questionnaires scores and reactivity to negative videos. Results document the importance of FPE to more fully characterize and understand social anxiety and SAD. Implications include amendments to future diagnostic criteria, theoretical models, and treatment approaches for SAD.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
People with SAD tend to respond to positive evaluations with elevated arousal compared to healthy controls.
“as well as their tendency to respond to positive evaluations with elevated arousal compared to healthy controls (81).”
From MDMA-Assisted Therapy as a Means to Alter Affective, Cognitive, Behavioral, and Neurological Systems Underlying Social Dysfunction in Social Anxiety Disorder (2021) · cites this paper as [81]
In “Incremental validity of FPE for group separation” (page unavailable), arousal responses to positive videos did not significantly distinguish SAD patients from healthy controls (p = .838). The “Limitations, outlook and conclusions” section instead describes attenuated positive reactivity to positive social evaluation in SAD, contrary to the claimed elevated arousal. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 62 · Cited by 29
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Dimberg, U. (1990). Facial electromyography and emotional reactions. Psychophysiology, 27 (5), 481-494.
- Stangier, U., Heidenreich, T., Berardi, A., Golbs, U., & Hoyer, J. (1999). Die Erfassung Sozialer Phobie durch die Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS) und die Social Phobia Scale (SPS) [Assessment of social phobia by the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS) and the Social Phobia Scale (SPS)]. Zeitschrift Fur Klinische Psychologie - Forschung und Praxis [Journal for Clinical Psychology - Research and Practice], 28 (1), 28-36.
- Authors
- Reichenberger, J., Wiggert, N., Wilhelm, F. H., Liedlgruber, M., Voderholzer, U., Hillert, A., Timmer, B., & Blechert, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Salzburg (AT)
- Medizinische Hochschule Brandenburg Theodor Fontane (DE)
- University Medical Center Freiburg (DE)
- Schön Klinik Roseneck (DE)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Behaviour Research and Therapy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-05
- Volume
- 116
- Pages
- 140-148
- ISSN
- 0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2922362361
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 62
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 3.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Österreichische Nationalbank Fonds (ÖNB-Fonds)
- Austrian National Bank Funds (J15555)
- European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (ERC-StG-2014 639445)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
- Keywords
- social anxiety disorder, fear of negative evaluation, fear of positive evaluation, facial electromyography, electrocardiogram, valence and arousal, approval ratings, incremental validity, diagnostic criteria
- MeSH terms
- Phobia, Social, Adult, Electrocardiography, Electromyography, Face, Fear, Female, Humans, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Social Perception, Case-Control Studies, 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