Sub-types of safety behaviours and their effects on social anxiety disorder.

Cognitive models suggest that social anxiety disorder (SAD) is maintained through the use of safety behaviours. Previous reports propose that these safety behaviours can be subdivided into two main categories: avoidance and impression management. Study 1 investigates whether certain safety behaviour...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Emily Gray, Esther T Beierl, David M Clark
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2019-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223165
id doaj-359acae4698946f7abb990d480206a23
record_format Article
spelling doaj-359acae4698946f7abb990d480206a232021-03-04T12:43:46ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032019-01-011410e022316510.1371/journal.pone.0223165Sub-types of safety behaviours and their effects on social anxiety disorder.Emily GrayEsther T BeierlDavid M ClarkCognitive models suggest that social anxiety disorder (SAD) is maintained through the use of safety behaviours. Previous reports propose that these safety behaviours can be subdivided into two main categories: avoidance and impression management. Study 1 investigates whether certain safety behaviours are specific to SAD. The social behaviour questionnaire was administered to individuals with SAD (N = 106), post-traumatic stress disorder (N = 28) and non-patient controls (N = 59). A factor analysis (N = 164) replicated the previously reported avoidance and impression management subtypes. Scores for both subtypes were significantly higher in individuals with SAD than in individuals with post-traumatic stress disorder or non-patient controls. Study 2 investigated the causal role of such safety behaviours using an experimental design in a non-clinical population (N = 96). Pairs of participants each engaged in two conversations. In one of the conversations, a randomly selected participant performed either avoidance or impression management safety behaviours. In the other conversation, neither participant was instructed to use safety behaviours. Each participant rated their own anxiety and performance as well as rating the other person. Videos of the conversations were also rated. Both types of safety behaviour increased anxiety in the person performing the safety behaviour. The avoidance subtype also had broader effects on the other person that were largely absent from the impression management subtype. Taken together the studies provide support for the distinction between safety behaviour subtypes and have implications for the treatment of SAD.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223165
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Emily Gray
Esther T Beierl
David M Clark
spellingShingle Emily Gray
Esther T Beierl
David M Clark
Sub-types of safety behaviours and their effects on social anxiety disorder.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Emily Gray
Esther T Beierl
David M Clark
author_sort Emily Gray
title Sub-types of safety behaviours and their effects on social anxiety disorder.
title_short Sub-types of safety behaviours and their effects on social anxiety disorder.
title_full Sub-types of safety behaviours and their effects on social anxiety disorder.
title_fullStr Sub-types of safety behaviours and their effects on social anxiety disorder.
title_full_unstemmed Sub-types of safety behaviours and their effects on social anxiety disorder.
title_sort sub-types of safety behaviours and their effects on social anxiety disorder.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2019-01-01
description Cognitive models suggest that social anxiety disorder (SAD) is maintained through the use of safety behaviours. Previous reports propose that these safety behaviours can be subdivided into two main categories: avoidance and impression management. Study 1 investigates whether certain safety behaviours are specific to SAD. The social behaviour questionnaire was administered to individuals with SAD (N = 106), post-traumatic stress disorder (N = 28) and non-patient controls (N = 59). A factor analysis (N = 164) replicated the previously reported avoidance and impression management subtypes. Scores for both subtypes were significantly higher in individuals with SAD than in individuals with post-traumatic stress disorder or non-patient controls. Study 2 investigated the causal role of such safety behaviours using an experimental design in a non-clinical population (N = 96). Pairs of participants each engaged in two conversations. In one of the conversations, a randomly selected participant performed either avoidance or impression management safety behaviours. In the other conversation, neither participant was instructed to use safety behaviours. Each participant rated their own anxiety and performance as well as rating the other person. Videos of the conversations were also rated. Both types of safety behaviour increased anxiety in the person performing the safety behaviour. The avoidance subtype also had broader effects on the other person that were largely absent from the impression management subtype. Taken together the studies provide support for the distinction between safety behaviour subtypes and have implications for the treatment of SAD.
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223165
work_keys_str_mv AT emilygray subtypesofsafetybehavioursandtheireffectsonsocialanxietydisorder
AT esthertbeierl subtypesofsafetybehavioursandtheireffectsonsocialanxietydisorder
AT davidmclark subtypesofsafetybehavioursandtheireffectsonsocialanxietydisorder
_version_ 1714801768120975360