Cited by 79Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychological Treatments and AssessmentsChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Lack of a benign interpretation bias in social anxiety disorder

Open access
Amir, Nader, Prouvost, Caroline, Kuckertz, Jennie M.·2012·Cognitive Behaviour Therapy

Abstract

Cognitive models of social anxiety posit that recurrent interpretation of ambiguous information as threatening maintains symptoms (e.g. Clark & Wells, 1995, pp. 69-93, Social phobia: Diagnosis, assessment, and treatment. New York: Guilford Press; Rapee & Heimberg, 1997, pp. 741-756, Behavior Research and Therapy, 35). However, biased interpretation may also be represented as a failure to make a benign interpretation of the ambiguous event. Furthermore, interpretation bias can be characterized by both an online (automatic) component and an offline (effortful) component (Hirsch & Clark, 2004, pp. 799-825, Clinical Psychology Review, 24). To measure both benign and threat biases, as well as examine the effect of social anxiety on offline versus online interpretations, Beard and Amir (2009, pp. 1135-1141, Behaviour Research and Therapy, 46) developed the Word Sentence Association Paradigm (WSAP). In the current study, we administered the WSAP to a group of participants diagnosed with social anxiety disorder (SAD) as well as to a group of non-anxious control (NAC) participants. We found that participants with SAD demonstrated a lack of benign online bias, but not an online threat bias when compared to NACs. However, when examining offline biases, SAD patients endorsed social threat interpretations and rejected benign social interpretations to a greater degree than non-anxious individuals. Our results, when taken together, clearly implicate the role of reduced bias toward benign information in SAD.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/16506073.2012.662655

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • People with SAD experience diminished positive affect and increased negative affect in social interactions in general.

    “For example, people with SAD experience diminished positive affect and increased negative affect in social interactions in general (32), and reduced positivity in response to social acceptance and enhanced negativity in response to social rejection (33).”

    From MDMA-Assisted Therapy as a Means to Alter Affective, Cognitive, Behavioral, and Neurological Systems Underlying Social Dysfunction in Social Anxiety Disorder (2021) · cites this paper as [32]

    The Discussion says people with SAD may be less likely to experience positive affect in social situations, supporting that part as a possibility rather than an established finding. The Results report greater endorsement of threatening interpretations of social sentences, but do not establish increased negative affect during social interactions in general. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. First MB Spitzer RL Gibbon M Williams JBW 1994 Structured clinical interview for axis I DSM-IV disorders: Patient edition New York, NY State Psychiatric Institute Biometrics Research Department

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Amir, N., Prouvost, C., & Kuckertz, J. M.
Affiliations
San Diego State University (US)
Corresponding author
Amir, Nader
Venue
Cognitive Behaviour Therapy
Published
2012-04-30
Volume
41
Issue
2
Pages
119-129
ISSN
  • 1650-6073 (ISSN-L)
  • 1651-2316
OpenAlex
W2045271008
Cited by
79
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
6.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH087623, R34MH077129, R34MH073004)
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 › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
social anxiety disorder, interpretation bias, threat interpretation, ambiguous information
MeSH terms
Adult, Affect, Arousal, Attention, Cues, Fear, Humans, Judgment, Personality Inventory, Phobic Disorders, Psychometrics, Reaction Time, Reading, Semantics, Social Behavior, Social Perception, Word Association Tests, Anticipation, Psychological

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