Social Anxiety Disorder

The cognitive paradigm stresses the cognitive aspect of learning. It attemps to understand behavior and learning through the understanding of thought processes. Gestalt theorists, Jean Piaget, Edward Chace Tolman, and Albert Bandura mainly operated within this school of thought. Cognitive theorists such as those mentioned, reject behaviorism on grounds that complex behavior are not merely a matter of cause and effect but of one’s ability to make logical choices as to what makes the most sense. It is undeniable that social anxiety is one disorder that involves maladaptive cognitive processing. Unfortunately individuals possessing this disorder choose to engage in maladaptive behavior that not only contributes to its development but to its maintenance as well.
What is Social Anxiety Disorder?
Social anxiety is experienced when one feels the pressure to make good impressions yet is doubtful of their social abilities. Social anxiety is considered normal and adaptive when this is used constructively in job interviews, first dates, and meeting new people. It becomes maladaptive when the emotion is used primarily to avoid social situations (Schlenker & Leary, 1982). According to the Mayo Clinic (2009) social anxiety disorder, also known as social phobia, include signs and symptoms such as intense fear of being in situations that is unfamiliar, where one may feel judged, and where others may notice feelings of discomfort. Other signs are worrying about embarrassing oneself and avoiding doing things or speaking to others for fear of embarrassment (para 2). People labeled as shy and introverted may have social anxiety disorder but this is definitely not always the case. Shyness is a common individual characteristic mildly resembling the disorder. Social anxiety disorder is an extreme form of shyness.
Many individuals with social anxiety disorder report that they have been socially anxious since childhood. Temperamental shyness begins from infancy with it being characterized by face and eye contact avoidance (Brunet, Mondloch, and Schmidt, 2010). Brunet et al. (2010) conducted a study on temperamental shyness in children and found that shy children are less able to distinguish certain facial emotions in others. Perhaps this may be due to lessened sensitivity to certain facial cues leading to secondary negative effects in social behavior seen later on in life.
Bandura’s Observational Learning
Bandura’s observational learning contends that humans naturally imitate what they see others do (Hergenhan & Olson, 2005, p. 341). In applying this to children, it is natural to conclude that children learn from their parent’s behavior. Children of socially anxious parents tend to become socially anxious themselves. This is probably compounded by the pressure parents place on their children to make good impressions on others as they themselves are concerned over others opinions of themselves. One of parents many responsibilities as role models to their children is modeling and helping their children cope and navigate in the social world. Unfortunately, because of their inability to cope socially themselves, their children grow up to be socially isolated as well. These parents fail to offer their children opportunities to interact with others which prevent their children from learning that social interactions can be enjoyable and gratifying. It also communicates to their children that social situations should be feared.
Divorce and parent separation also have effects on children’s cognitive processing. It is found that children of divorce and separated parents witnessing marital and verbal aggression are factors that cause social phobias. Another factor to consider when it comes to parenting is parent-child attachment. Insecure attachment or lack of close relationships with an adult has been shown to cause shyness. As one navigates and learns social norms and etiquette, social schemas are developed.
Parent-child relationships and attachment are the earliest interpersonal relationship that a child comes to experience and as such have direct impact to personality development. Securely attached children have “attentive and responsive” parents; insecurely attached children have parents who are undependable, rejecting, and lacking in warmth (Ledley & Heimberg, 2006). It was found that children who formed secure parental attachment were more socially active, more popular, and less socially anxious. Early attachment patterns can influence the development of beliefs about social relationships. Secure-attached children come to “see others as accepting and dependable” while those that do not “see others as critical and unreliable” (Ledley & Heimberg, 2006).
Perceived Self Efficacy versus Real Self Efficacy
Bandura also believed in self regulation of behavior and how it relates to perceived
and real self efficacy. Bandura believed that human behavior is mainly self regulated. Perceived self efficacy is a person’s belief about his capabilities. It determines how one motivates oneself, think, feel, and behave. It develops from personal accomplishments and failures. It also arises from seeing others who are like oneself fail and succeed. High self efficacy means internal locus of control. Because of this they tend to try, accomplish, and persist more. Individuals with low self efficacy have external locus of control which makes them fearful. Individuals tend to experience fear in events over which they have no control and therefore are uncertain of (Hergenhahn & Olson, 2005, p. 350).
Individuals with social phobias have a distorted image of how they are perceived socially. Because of their avoidance to face and eye contact they tend to miss certain social cues. Attention is focused inward unto themselves and on how they believe they are coming across to others. For individuals who are socially anxious, it is difficult to place their focus and attention to the social situation at hand. Rather, focus is placed on how they feel they are coming across and what is going on internally.
Model of Looming Vulnerability
Looming Vulnerability models depicts a cognitive style that evaluates and overestimates threats represented in environment. This model is based on the assumption that all organisms must be able to distinguish between increasing or decreasing threats in order to survive. For the well adjusted, perception is an accurate appraisal of a given situation, for the maladjusted it is not. The looming vulnerability cognitive style then relates to how one experiences an exaggerated state of danger or rising risk of threat. According to Riskind, Williams, and Joiner (2006), the looming cognitive style “functions as a danger schema that biases information processing, activates worry, and other defensive or compensatory behavior.
Numerous studies suggest that attention, judgment, and interpretation biases exist in those with social anxiety disorder. Studies involving Stroop and Dot-Probe tests investigate these biases and how the role the play in the development and maintenance of this form of anxiety. In a Stroop test participants are shown words written in various ink colors. Participants are then asked to say the ink color. Individuals with the disorder were slow to respond indicating that they were preoccupied with the meaning of the word rather than attending to the color. In the dot test, participants were showed either words or faces where one of which was neutral in emotion and the other containing emotional valence (such as socially threatening words, angry faces). A dot then replaced one of the words/faces. Socially anxious individuals were found to respond more quickly when the dot was placed in the emotionally charged word/face and reacted slower for the neutral word/face. Both the Stroop and the dot test studies demonstrate attention biases. That is, individuals with social anxiety disorder have a tendency to attend to stimulus that they find threatening (Ledley & Heimber, 2006).
Judgment and interpretation biases also exist for the social phobic. They also are likely to think that other people interpret physical symptoms they are showing such as blushing, shaking, or sweating as signs of anxiety problems or other psychiatric disorder (Ledley & Heimber, 2006). Because of how their information processing works, they fail to consider that others might be seeing these physical symptoms as merely being hot, cold, or tired. When recalling social situations, those with social anxiety disorders interpret ambiguous situations negatively although they are positive interpretations can be applicable. They are also predisposed to judge themselves negatively than they are actually judged and would judge others in similar situations. Cognitive processes of the socially phobic see social events as a threat because to them it is a means to potential of public embarrassment, criticism, and disapproval. They, in short, will generate threatening circumstances in their mind of rapidly intensifying danger of social rejection.
Life space and Law of Pragnanz
Gestalt psychology works mainly inside the frame of the cognitive paradigm. Gestalt theorist contends that humans (and animals for that matter) think in terms of wholes. That is, stimuli are configured on what they mean as a whole unit. Kurt Lewis, a gestalt psychologist, came up with the concept of life space to explain human motivation and behavior. Life space, according to Lewis, is the sum of all psychological facts. Psychological facts pertain to anything and everything an individual is aware of at any given point in time. It is its whole that then determines behavior. Unfortunately, the psychological facts the socially anxious deals with are negative beliefs full of distortions and biases in the processing of social information.
Another concept coming from Gestalt paradigm is Koffka’s Law of Pragnanz. It basically answers the question, “How does the mind organize sensory information and make it meaningful?”(Hergenhahn & Olson, 2005, p.270). It contends that thoughts are already pre-organized before it is even experienced. That is, external stimuli are actively transformed by the brain and it is this transformed information of which one becomes conscious of. Our conscious experiences therefore of events are a result of the brains interpretation of external stimuli.
Socially anxious individuals have an avoidance tendency to divert attention away from faces. On doing so, they miss out on important cues to make conversation go along smoothly. Eye contact is also avoided which can make them seem that they are lacking in social skills, are disinterested, or are uncomfortable. Interestingly, they will tend to seek out negative cues from people with whom they are interacting with. These cues include yawning, the person discontinuing the conversation, and the person gazing around room. Perhaps they choose to look for negative cues as this confirms their perceptions of self simply because this is the information and situation that they are most used to and comfortable with.
It is important to recognize if one’s cognitive style causes anxiety in social situations as awareness and knowledge can serve as a means of prevention and intervention not only for the adult affected but for subsequent generations as well.


References
Brunet, P., Mondloch, C., & Schmidt, L... (2010). Shy Children are Less Sensitive to
Some Cues to Facial Recognition. Child Psychiatry and Human
Development, 41(1), 1-14. Retrieved March 21, 2010, from ProQuest Health and
Medical Complete. (Document ID: 1926277891).
Hergenhahn, B. R. & Olson, M. (2005) An introduction to theories of learning
(7th ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Ledley, D.R. & Heimberg, R.G. (2006). Cognitive vulnerability to social anxiety.

Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 25(7), 755-778.

Retrieved March 17, 2010, from Research Library. (Document ID: 1157224361).

Mayo Clinic (2009) Social anxiety disorder (Social phobia). Retrieved March 16, 2010
from http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/social-anxiety disorder/DS00595/DSECTION=symptoms
Riskind, J.H, Williams, N.L., & Joiner, T.H. (2006). The looming cognitive style: A
cognitive vulnerability for anxiety disorders. Journal of Social and Clinical
Psychology, 25(7), 779-801. Retrieved March 17, 2010, from Research Library.
(Document ID: 1157224381).
Schlenker, B.R., & Leary, M.R. (1982). Social anxiety and self-presentation: A
conceptualization model. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 641-669.