Cited by 48Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesDigital Mental Health InterventionsPsychological Treatments and Assessments

Self-help cognitive–behavioral therapy with minimal therapist contact for social phobia: A controlled trial

Abramowitz, Jonathan S., Moore, Elizabeth L., Braddock, Autumn E., Harrington, Diana L.·2009·Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry

Abstract

Due to treatment accessibility and cost issues, interest in self-help programs (e.g., bibliotherapy, telehealth) for common psychological disorders is growing. Research supporting the efficacy of such a program for social anxiety, however, is limited. The present study examined the efficacy of an 8-week self-directed cognitive behavioral treatment with minimal therapist involvement for social phobia based on a widely available self-help book. Twenty-one adults with social phobia initially received either treatment (i.e. assigned readings in the workbook with limited therapist contact) or were wait-listed. Wait-listed patients eventually received the same self-directed treatment. Results revealed that the self-help/minimal therapist contact treatment was superior to wait-list on most outcome measures. Across the entire sample, reductions in social anxiety, global severity, general anxiety, and depression were observed at posttest and 3-month follow-up. These findings provide preliminary support for using this self-help workbook for individuals with mild to moderate social anxiety in conjunction with infrequent therapist visits to reinforce the treatment principles. Study limitations and future directions are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jbtep.2008.04.004

Cites

24 of 24 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Abramowitz, J. S., Moore, E. L., Braddock, A. E., & Harrington, D. L.
Affiliations
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
Corresponding author
Abramowitz, Jonathan S.
Venue
Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-03
Volume
40
Issue
1
Pages
98-105
ISSN
0005-7916 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2008322953
Cited by
48
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 4
FWCI
5.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Mayo Clinic
  • Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
Keywords
social anxiety disorder, social anxiety, self-help, cognitive behavioral therapy, self-directed treatment, bibliotherapy, self-help workbook, treatment accessibility, waitlist control
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Books, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Middle Aged, Phobic Disorders, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychotherapy, Group, Self-Help Groups, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, 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