Cited by 128Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentMental Health Treatment and Access

Social phobia subtypes in the general population revealed by cluster analysis

FURMARK, T., TILLFORS, M., STATTIN, H., EKSELIUS, L., FREDRIKSON, M.·2000·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological data on subtypes of social phobia are scarce and their defining features are debated. Hence, the present study explored the prevalence and descriptive characteristics of empirically derived social phobia subgroups in the general population. METHODS: To reveal subtypes, data on social distress, functional impairment, number of social fears and criteria fulfilled for avoidant personality disorder were extracted from a previously published epidemiological study of 188 social phobics and entered into an hierarchical cluster analysis. Criterion validity was evaluated by comparing clusters on the Social Phobia Scale (SPS) and the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS). Finally, profile analyses were performed in which clusters were compared on a set of sociodemographic and descriptive characteristics. RESULTS: Three clusters emerged, consisting of phobics scoring either high (generalized subtype), intermediate (non-generalized subtype) or low (discrete subtype) on all variables. Point prevalence rates were 2.0%, 5.9% and 7.7% respectively. All subtypes were distinguished on both SPS and SIAS. Generalized or severe social phobia tended to be over-represented among individuals with low levels of educational attainment and social support. Overall, public-speaking was the most common fear. CONCLUSIONS: Although categorical distinctions may be used, the present data suggest that social phobia subtypes in the general population mainly differ dimensionally along a mild moderate-severe continuum, and that the number of cases declines with increasing severity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0033291799002615

Cites

16 of 16 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
FURMARK, T., TILLFORS, M., STATTIN, H., EKSELIUS, L., & FREDRIKSON, M.
Affiliations
Uppsala University (SE)
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
2000-11
Volume
30
Issue
6
Pages
1335-1344
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W2004104050
Cited by
128
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 6
FWCI
5.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
social anxiety disorder, generalized social phobia, avoidant personality disorder, social distress, functional disability, social interaction anxiety, social support, educational attainment, prevalence, general population
MeSH terms
Adult, Analysis of Variance, Female, Humans, Male, Models, Psychological, Phobic Disorders, Population Surveillance, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Sampling Studies, Severity of Illness Index, Socioeconomic Factors, Sweden, Reproducibility of Results, Prevalence, Cluster Analysis

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