Cited by 379Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychometric Methodologies and TestingPsychological Testing and Assessment

Development of a short form Social Interaction Anxiety (SIAS) and Social Phobia Scale (SPS) using nonparametric item response theory: The SIAS-6 and the SPS-6.

Peters, Lorna, Sunderland, Matthew, Andrews, Gavin, Rapee, Ronald M., Mattick, Richard P.·2012·Psychological Assessment

Abstract

Shortened forms of the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS) and the Social Phobia Scale (SPS) were developed using nonparametric item response theory methods. Using data from socially phobic participants enrolled in 5 treatment trials (N = 456), 2 six-item scales (the SIAS-6 and the SPS-6) were developed. The validity of the scores on the SIAS-6 and the SPS-6 was then tested using traditional methods for their convergent validity in an independent clinical sample and a student sample, as well as for their sensitivity to change and diagnostic sensitivity in the clinical sample. The scores on the SIAS-6 and the SPS-6 correlated as well as the scores on the original SIAS and SPS, with scores on measures of related constructs, discriminated well between those with and without a diagnosis of social phobia, providing cutoffs for diagnosis and were as sensitive to measuring change associated with treatment as were the SIAS and SPS. Together, the SIAS-6 and the SPS-6 appear to be an efficient method of measuring symptoms of social phobia and provide a brief screening tool.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0024544

Cites

44 of 44 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 45 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Peters, L., Sunderland, M., Andrews, G., Rapee, R. M., & Mattick, R. P.
Affiliations
  • Macquarie University (AU)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
Venue
Psychological Assessment
Published
2012
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
66-76
ISSN
  • 1040-3590 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-134X
OpenAlex
W1990480344
Cited by
379
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 48 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 2
FWCI
7.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Assessment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Health and Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
Keywords
social anxiety disorder, Social Interaction Anxiety Scale, Social Phobia Scale, short-form scale, nonparametric item response theory, psychometric validation, convergent validity, sensitivity to change, diagnostic sensitivity, screening tool, symptom assessment
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Psychological, Phobic Disorders, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Sensitivity and Specificity, Time Factors, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Statistics, Nonparametric, Young Adult, Self Report

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