Cited by 37Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesBehavioral Health and InterventionsSocial and Intergroup Psychology

Mindsets in social anxiety: a new look at selective information processing

Hiemisch, Anette, Ehlers, Anke, Westermann, Rainer·2002·Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry

Abstract

According to the Rubicon Model of Action Phases (in: J. Gollwitzer, 1996), Motivation, volition, and action, Enzyclopedia of psychology, series "motivation and emotion", Vol. 4, Hogrefe, Göttingen, 1996, pp. 531-582), different stages in goal pursuit are accompanied by different mindsets that enhance processing of mindset-congruous information. Before people engage in action, they usually deliberate possible goals for a given situation (deliberative mindset). Once a goal is chosen, they plan how to achieve this particular goal (implemental mindset). The present experiments tested the hypothesis that people with social anxiety show a reversal of mindsets when approaching social situations. In Experiment 1, 20 students were asked to either deliberate goals for a hypothetical social conflict (deliberation), or to think about steps to solve the conflict (implementation). An unexpected recognition test demonstrated different recognition memory for deliberation-related versus implementation-related information in the two groups, consistent with the hypothesis of different mindsets. In Experiment 2, 48 students who were either high or low in social anxiety were randomly assigned to either the deliberation or the implementation condition. Participants high in social anxiety showed a pattern in the recognition test that was consistent with a reversal of mindsets. When asked to plan social situations, they showed an inappropriate deliberative mindset. In contrast, they lacked a deliberative mindset when deliberating goals for the social situation. The result indicate that socially anxious people engage in information processing that interferes with successful goal attainment when approaching social situations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0005-7916(02)00022-8

Cites

30 of 30 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

1 of the 31 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hiemisch, A., Ehlers, A., & Westermann, R.
Affiliations
Universität Greifswald (DE)
Corresponding author
Ehlers, Anke
Venue
Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-06
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
103-114
ISSN
0005-7916 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2157957133
Cited by
37
References
31
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4
FWCI
0.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (069777)
  • Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
social anxiety, mindset, deliberative mindset, implemental mindset, goal pursuit, selective information processing, recognition memory, social conflict, planning, goal achievement
MeSH terms
Adult, Decision Making, Female, Goals, Humans, Male, Mental Processes, Motivation, Phobic Disorders, Psychological Theory, Random Allocation, Social Behavior, Social Environment

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