Development and validation of measures of social phobia scrutiny fear and social interaction anxiety1

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(97)10031-6Get rights and content

Abstract

The development and validation of the Social Phobia Scale (SPS) and the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS) two companion measures for assessing social phobia fears is described. The SPS assesses fears of being scrutinised during routine activities (eating, drinking, writing, etc.), while the SIAS assesses fears of more general social interaction, the scales corresponding to the DSM-III-R descriptions of Social Phobia—Circumscribed and Generalised types, respectively. Both scales were shown to possess high levels of internal consistency and test–retest reliability. They discriminated between social phobia, agoraphobia and simple phobia samples, and between social phobia and normal samples. The scales correlated well with established measures of social anxiety, but were found to have low or non-significant (partial) correlations with established measures of depression, state and trait anxiety, locus of control, and social desirability. The scales were found to change with treatment and to remain stable in the face of no-treatment. It appears that these scales are valid, useful, and easily scored measures for clinical and research applications, and that they represent an improvement over existing measures of social phobia.

Introduction

Self-report scales are central to the measurement of both clinical status and therapy-outcome of the anxiety disorders. Over the last 20 years a large number of such scales have been developed and refined. While many have measured social anxiety, little attention has been focused on designing comprehensive and valid measures of either the specific fears of scrutiny or the more generalised social interaction anxieties which are recognised to feature in this disorder (American Psychiatric Association, 1980American Psychiatric Association, 1987).

One exception is the Fear Questionnaire developed by Marks and Mathews (1979)which includes a social phobia subscale. While this subscale appears to have construct validity and good psychometric properties (see Marks and Mathews, 1979), it was originally designed as a brief self-rating scale, not as a comprehensive device to assess social phobia. The subscale involves only five items: eating or drinking with other people; being watched or stared at; talking to people in authority; being criticised; and, speaking or acting to an audience; and thus leaves out important social phobia fears, including the generalised fear of social interaction and the more specific fears of writing or signing one’s name while others are observing, urinating in public toilets, blushing, shaking and trembling, etc. As such it is less than fully adequate as a measure of social phobia.

Turning to the other scales used in social phobia research, two have featured prominently: the Social Avoidance and Distress Scale (SADS) and the Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale (FNES; Watson and Friend, 1969). Neither of these scales assesses the scrutiny fears central to the disorder (American Psychiatric Association, 1987). The FNES focuses on the maladaptive cognitions that appear, from both clinical impression (e.g. Butler, 1985; American Psychiatric Association, 1980, American Psychiatric Association, 1987) and empirical research (Mattick and Peters, 1988; Mattick et al., 1989), to underly social phobia. The SADS assesses the more generalised social interaction fears described, most recently, in the DSM-III-R as featuring in social phobia (American Psychiatric Association, 1987). Items in the SADS measure avoidance of meeting others, talking with others, attending social events because of tension and anxiety when undertaking such activities. No items address the other prominent difficulties of social phobia, such as eating, drinking, writing, and using public toilets when in the presence of others. Neither do the items in the SADS address the fears of being perceived as sick, odd, shaking, or having lost control when undertaking such activities, fears which are central to the scrutiny fears in social phobia (American Psychiatric Association, 1980, American Psychiatric Association, 1987).

Most recently, the appropriateness of the SADS (and the FNES) as a measure of social phobia has been questioned. Turner et al. (1987)administered the SADS to a variety of patient groups corresponding to the major DSM-III anxiety disorder categories. They noted a lack of discriminant ability for this scale, and concluded that while it is sensitive to emotional distress, it is not specific for social phobia. Turner et al. (1987)argued that other more specific instruments are needed to adequately assess social phobia. Similarly, Barlow and Wolfe (1981)had earlier noted that “considerably more research is needed on the development of accurate measures of…social anxieties and phobias” (p. 451).

In attempting this task it may prove useful to provide a distinction between types of social fear. The constructs involved do appear to fall into two distinguishable areas. Descriptors such as shyness, dating anxiety, heterosexual social anxiety, communication anxiety, and interpersonal anxiety, appear to share a common feature of describing difficulties mixing or interacting with others. By way of contrast, speech anxiety and scrutiny fears (e.g. eating, drinking, writing, etc.) appear distinct, in-as-much as these activities do not necessarily involve interacting with other people, but rather simply being in a situation where one is being watched or observed, or feels others are watching, when undertaking the activity.

Leary (1983)has provided a similar conceptual distinction between these types of social fear on the basis of the structure of the situations in which anxiety occurs. He argued that “Interpersonal encounters differ in the degree to which an individual’s responses follow from or are contingent upon the responses of other interactants” (p. 68). In the case of ‘contingent interactions’ (Leary, 1983), responses are continuously contingent upon, and tailored to, the responses of other individuals (as in social interactions). In ‘non-contingent encounters’, behaviour is guided primarily by one’s plans and such behaviour is minimally, if at all, guided by the responses of others present in the situation (as in the case of scrutiny fears). Similarly, the DSM-III-R (American Psychiatric Association, 1987) has recently suggested this same distinction in specifying two important aspects of disturbance in social phobia: the circumscribed fears of scrutiny whilst eating, drinking, talking in public, urinating, and writing with associated concerns of blushing, trembling, etc.; and the more “general fears of [social interactions, including] saying foolish things or not being able to answer questions” (p. 241).

On the basis of the considerations outlined above, the present study was undertaken to construct and validate two companion measures for the assessment of social fears. The development of such instruments would be of value in both research studies on social phobia, and as clinical assessment devices, given the apparent inadequacies of the current measures. Thus, two scales were developed: a social phobia scale assessing scrutiny fears and a social interaction anxiety scale.

Section snippets

Definitions

On the basis of the foregoing conceptualisations of social phobia scrutiny fears and social interaction anxiety, two definitions were derived. As used here, the term social phobia refers to anxiety and fear at the prospect of being observed or watched by other people, and in particular, where the individual expresses distress when undertaking certain activities in the presence of others. These activities may include eating, drinking, writing, signing one’s name, using public toilets, working,

Scale item characteristics

The SPS and SIAS were both found to be normally distributed. All of the retained items were found to have corrected item-total correlations equal to, or greater than, 0.40 (P<0.001) for either one or both of the socially phobic and unselected (normal) samples. The SPS had a number of items with item-total correlations of less than 0.40 (cf. Nunnally, 1967) for the social phobic sample, and this result may reflect the fact that sufferers can experience one or two, but not necessarily all, of the

Discussion

The SPS and SIAS were developed in an attempt to provide reliable and valid instruments for the assessment of social phobia. The scales were developed on the basis of items derived from existing social anxiety and fear inventories, and from clinical interviews with patients. The new scales appear to be internally consistent and to possess good test–retest reliability. They discriminate between clinical groups, as well as between social phobics and normal samples. They correlate with established

Acknowledgements

This report is based on a part of the first author’s doctoral dissertation research conducted in the School of Psychology at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, supervised by J. C. Clarke.

The research was partly supported by an Australian Government Commonwealth Postgraduate Research Award.

We thank Erol DiGiusto, Sally Hurt, and Ron Rapee for assistance with the independent assessment of the scale items, Gavin Stewart, Phoebe Holt, Lorna Peters and Allen Yates for assistance

References (25)

  • A.T. Beck et al.

    Screening depressed patients in family practice: A rapid technique

    Postgraduate Medicine

    (1972)
  • B. Bryant et al.

    Social difficulty in a student sample

    British Journal of Educational Psychology

    (1974)
  • Cited by (2516)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    1

    Editor’s note: This article was written before the development of some contemporary measures of social phobia, such as the Social Phobia and Anxiety Inventory (Turner et al., 1989). We have invited this article for publication because of the growing interest in the scales described therein. S.T.

    View full text