Self-report questionnaires, behavioral assessment tasks, and an implicit behavior measure: do they predict social anxiety in everyday life?

Social anxiety is commonly assessed with self-report measures. This study aimed to investigate whether maximum anxiety levels during in vivo and virtual reality behavioral assessment tasks (BATs), and implicit approach-avoidance tendencies during the approach-avoidance task (AAT) explain more variation as predictors of daily social anxiety than self-report measures. A total of 62 university students (Mage = 20.79; SD = 4.91) with high levels of social anxiety completed self-report measures on fear of negative evaluation (FNE-B) as well as fear and avoidance in social situations (Liebowitz social anxiety scale-self report), in vivo and virtual reality BATs, and the AAT (independent variables) in the laboratory. On seven consecutive days, social anxiety, experiential avoidance, and negative social events (dependent variables) were assessed. The results revealed that fear of negative evaluation predicted everyday social anxiety and experiential avoidance. Fear and avoidance in social situations only predicted experiential avoidance. Neither implicit approach-avoidance tendencies during the AAT nor maximum anxiety levels during the in vivo and virtual reality BATs predicted any outcome variable. Our results support the use of self-report questionnaires in the assessment of social anxiety

A randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral therapy and sertraline versus a wait-list control group for anxiety disorders in older adults.

Objective: This study is the first to investigate the relative effectiveness of cognitive? behavioral therapy (CBT) compared with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI; sertraline) in a randomized, controlled trial on the treatment of anxiety disorders in older adults. Method: Eighty-four patients 60 years of age and over with a principal diagnosis of generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder, agoraphobia, or social phobia were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: 15 sessions of CBT, pharmacologic treatment with an SSRI (sertraline; maximum dosage 150 mg), or a waitlist control group. Participants completed measures of primary outcome (anxiety) and coexistent worry and depressive symptoms at baseline, posttreatment, and at three-month follow up. Results: Attrition rates were high in both treatment groups. Consequently, findings are based on a relatively small sample of completers (N=52). Although both CBT and sertraline led to significant improvement in anxiety, worry, and depressive symptoms both at posttreatment and at three-month follow up, sertraline showed superior results on worry symptoms. Effect size estimates for CBT were in the small to medium range both at posttreatment (mean d = 0.42) and at three-month follow up (mean d=0.35), whereas effect sizes for sertraline fell into the large range (posttreatment mean d = 0.94 and three-month follow up mean d= 1.02). The waitlist condition showed virtually no effects (posttreatment mean d = .03). Conclusions: Our findings strongly suggest that the pharmacologic treatment of late-life anxiety with SSRIs has not been given the proper attention in research to date

Self-observation versus flooding in the treatment of agoraphobia

The effects on agoraphobia of (1) self-observation with a minimum of therapeutic intervention. (2) flooding, (3) a combination of flooding and self-observation, and (4) no-treatment control were compared. Assessments were made at the beginning of treatment, during and at the end of treatment and at the follow-up three months later. They were carried out by the therapist (in vivo) measurement; phobic anxiety and phobic avoidance scale) by an independent observer (phobic anxiety scale and phobic avoidance scale) and by the client (phobic anxiety scale; phobic avoidance scale: FSS; social anxiety scale; SDS and I-E scale). Self-observation, flooding and flooding/self-observation resulted in significant improvement on several variables, whereas the no-treatment control group did not improve. No difference in effectiveness was found between the self-observation and flooding treatments. In addition, the results suggest that a combined flooding/self-observation treatment is more effective than each of the individual treatments

Effects of historically portrayed modeling and group treatment on self-observation: A comparison with agoraphobics

The effects of historically portrayed modeling and group treatment on self-observation were determined in a factorial design with agoraphobic patients. Group 1 saw a videofilm and was treated individually; group 2 saw the film and received group treatment; group 3 did not see the film and received individual treatment; and group 4 did not see the film and received group treatment. In the video recording improved ‘ex-clients’ related their experiences with the same treatment. Assessments were made at the beginning and at the end of treatment and at the follow-up 1 month later. Assessments were carried out by an independent observer (measurement in vivo, phobic anxiety and avoidance scales, anxious mood and panic), and by the client (phobic anxiety and avoidance scales, FSS, Social Anxiety Scale, SDS and I-E scale). Group treatment was just as effective as individual treatment. The videofilm did not increase the effect of the treatmen

Flooding in imagination vs flooding in vivo: A comparison with agoraphobics

In this investigation of agoraphobic patients, 3 different flooding procedures were compared: (1) prolonged exposure in vivo, (2) flooding in the imagination by a ‘live’ therapist and (3) a combination of flooding in the imagination and flooding in vivo. After an intermediate-test all clients were treated by the self-observation method, with a minimum of therapeutic intervention. Assessments were made at the beginning of treatment, during and at the end of treatment and at the follow-up one month later. Assessments were carried out by the therapist (in vivo measurement; phobic anxiety and avoidance scales; anxious mood and panic), by an independent observer (idem. minus in vivo measurement) and by the client (phobic anxiety and avoidance scales; FSS; social anxiety scale; SDS and I-E scale). Prolonged exposure in vivo plainly proved to be superior to flooding in the imagination. Combined flooding resulted in a greater improvement than flooding in the imagination, though only on the therapist's ratings. Self-observation did not add much to the effect of prolonged exposure in vivo and of flooding combined whereas self-observation, preceded by flooding in the imagination, resulted in a significant improvement on nearly all the variables

Individualized versus standardized therapy:A comparative evaluation with obsessive‐compulsive patients

The aim of this study was to investigate whether individualized tailor‐made behavioural treatment based upon a problem analysis of each case was more effective than a standardized behavioural treatment protocol. Twenty‐two obsessive‐compulsive patients were randomly assigned to two treatment conditions: (1) tailor‐made cognitive behavioural therapy and (2) standardized exposure in vivo therapy. Treatment in both conditions led to significant improvements on obsessive‐compulsive targets and on the Maudsley Obsessional‐Compulsive Inventory. Improvement generalized to general levels of psychopathology, depressed mood and social anxiety. Contrary to expectations the individualized treatment was not more effective than the standardized exposure therapy

The structure of obsessive-compulsive symptoms

In the present study, the structure of obsessive-compulsive symptoms was investigated by means of the Padua Inventory (PI). Simultaneous Components Analysis on data from obsessive-compulsives (n = 206), patients with other anxiety disorders (n = 222), and a non clinical sample (n = 430) revealed a five-factor solution. These factors are: (I) impulses; (II) washing; (III) checking; (IV) rumination; and (V) precision. Forty-one items were selected as measure of these factors. The reliability for the five subscales, assessing each of the five factors, was found to be satisfactory to excellent. Four subscales (washing, checking, rumination and precision) discriminated between panic disorder patients, social phobics and normals on the one hand and obsessive compulsives on the other. The Impulses subscale discriminated between obsessive-compulsives on the one hand and normals on the other, but not between obsessive-compulsives and social phobics or panic patients. Some evidence in support of the construct validity was found. The Padua Inventory-Revised (41-items) appears to measure the structure of obsessive compulsive symptoms: The main types of behaviours and obsessions as seen clinically are assessed by this questionnaire, apart from obsessional slowness