Ecological momentary assessment of post-event processing in between two speech tasks: Relationships with cognitive and affective factors involved in the maintenance of social anxiety
Abstract
Socially anxious individuals tend to review past distressing social situations, a process called post-event processing. The goal of this 4-day study was to investigate how PEP evolved over time in between two speech tasks in a sample of 101 students using ecological momentary assessment (EMA). In addition, we examined the relationships between post-event processing and other cognitive and affective processes involved in social anxiety, including anticipatory processing, anxiety, performance appraisals, and memory. Results from EMA showed that post-event and anticipatory processing decreased over time. Higher anxiety during the speech and poorer performance appraisals predicted more post-event processing, though post-event processing was unrelated to changes in performance appraisals over time. Post-event processing the day following the first speech was positively associated with anticipatory processing the day before the second speech. Participants who engaged in more post-event processing also remembered the first speech differently (e.g., more negative and emotionally intense). Implications for the cognitive-behavioural treatment of social anxiety are discussed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Postevent processing decreased after a speech task.
“Another study that explored PEP showed that it decreased after a speech task [68].”
From Studies of Social Anxiety Using Ambulatory Assessment: Systematic Review (2024) · cites this paper as [68]
The level of anxiety in the speech task predicted engagement in postevent processing, which activated a more intense experience of the negative balanced memory.
“The level of anxiety in the speech task predicted engagement in PEP, and this activated a more intense experience of the negative balanced memory, indicating the interconnectedness of cognitive-affective processes.”
From Studies of Social Anxiety Using Ambulatory Assessment: Systematic Review (2024) · cites this paper as [68]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 42 · Cited by 6
- Authors
- Kane, L., & Ashbaugh, A. R.
- Affiliations
- University of Ottawa (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Ashbaugh, Andrea R.
- Venue
- Behaviour Research and Therapy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2022-12
- Volume
- 159
- Pages
- 104208
- ISSN
- 0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4303859207
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1
- FWCI
- 0.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- 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 › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
- Keywords
- post-event processing, social anxiety, speaking anxiety, anticipatory processing, performance evaluation, memory, anxiety maintenance, cognitive-behavioral intervention, ecological momentary assessment
- MeSH terms
- Ecological Momentary Assessment, Anxiety, Cognition, Fear, Humans, Speech
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