Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39590028›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of investigation in health, psychology and education2024

Bivalent Fears of Evaluation in Social Anxiety: Evaluation of an Extended Psychoevolutionary Model.

Glen W Bates, Pragalathan Apputhurai, Simon R Knowles

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Glen W BatesDepartment of Psychology, School of Health Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, VIC 3122, Australia.
Pragalathan ApputhuraiDepartment of Health Sciences and Biostatistics, School of Health Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, VIC 3122, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1667-6315
Simon R KnowlesDepartment of Psychology, School of Health Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, VIC 3122, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8000-1000

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fears of negative evaluation (FNEs) and fears of positive evaluation (FPEs) comprise a bivalent model of evaluation that can explain the aetiology and maintenance of Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD). In this study, we examined an extended version of this model which incorporates two related cognitive processes (concerns about reprisal and discounting of positive outcomes) as partial mediators of the effects of FNEs and FPEs. We built on earlier work by including a broader measure of social anxiety across different social situations and comparing models for groups of participants with and without probable SAD. Structural equation modelling was utilised to test the model in a sample of 890 university students (74.8% female, mean age 29.49). We replicated the findings of Cook et al. in the overall sample and in the group with probable SAD. FNEs and FPEs predicted social anxiety directly and were serially mediated by concerns about reprisal and discounting positive outcomes. The model was also a good fit for those without SAD; however, in the model, FNEs were no longer a direct predictor of social anxiety. The findings confirm the utility of the extended bivalent model and have implications for psychoevolutionary accounts of social anxiety.

Indexed as

bivalent fear of evaluation modelfear of negative evaluationfear of positive evaluationsocial anxiety disorder

Identifiers

PMID39590028
PMCPMC11592495

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.