Analysis of Interpretation of Bias in Adults & Teens Dissertation

This research study applauds on subtypes of anxiety using social analytic approach. From a population of teenagers and adults, symptoms of social anxiety, social circumstances under which these symptoms occur, and the general background literature are analyzed. Under factor analysis, four components are identified as performance anxiety, tenacity, offensive fear, and inadequate social feelings. In the category of subtypes derived via cluster analysis, four components are identified as interpersonal, offensive, performance, and mild anxiety types. Many situations can trigger anxiety symptoms resulting into different response across ages.

Thus, this research paper aims at analyzing interpretation of bias in adults and teenagers.

Individuals thought to be socially anxious are more negative in interpreting ambiguous social events (Vassilopoulos, 2011). The process of social interaction may proceed with a positive, negative, or an ambiguous cue. Facial expression may determine the kind of response to expect from an individual. For instance, a frown is directly linked with threat interpretation. However, a smile is associated with a non-threat interpretation (Vassilopoulos, 2011; Huppert, Foa, Furr, Filip, & Mathews, 2003). In independent efforts to analyze social anxiety interpretation, many psychologists in the resent past have carried out research on anxiety interpretation and classification of bias in teenagers and adults. These collections of research findings suggest that socially anxious individuals tend to be more negative in their interpretation of ambiguous events happening around them( Taylor, Bomyea, Amir, & Emotion, 2011; Huppert, Foa, Furr, Filip, & Mathews, 2003; Beard & Amir, 2010; Amir, Beard & Bower, 2005). If these findings are quantifiable, it is possible to identify factors that may be the secondary agents of anxiety and biasness. Only Hofmann, Asnnani, and Hinton’s study test the hypothesis that the result of biasness may be related to depression and general anxiety as an overview (Hofmann, Asnnani, & Hinton, 2010). Little research is available on the possibility of negative bias interpretation being associated with social anxiety. Thus, there is need to establish a quantitative relationship between an individual anxiety and the possibility of being negatively biased in interpreting and responding to an ambiguous social event. Some of the above findings are questionable and may not present a clear picture of the real scenario. For instance, immature adoption of covariance methodology is inappropriate when the sample group consists of independent variables such as biasness of the researcher (Huppert, Foa, Furr, Filip, & Mathews, 2003). Thus, the hypothesis of this research project is to prove that individuals who are socially anxious are prone to negative biases interpretation of ambiguous social events than the nonanxious among the teenagers and adults of age below fifty years. This design may enable the research findings to quantify social anxiety as the agent for any observed interpretation effect and not general anxiety.

Literature Review

A relevant explanation for negative interpretation and biasness can be analyzed by studying facial expression for a number of situations and events. Reflecting on ‘nonthreat’ and ‘threat’ response research, facial expression can be linked to likelihood of expecting a positive, negative, or neutral response (Festa & Ginsburg, 2011; Amir, Beard, & Bower, 2005). During a presentation session, little concentration by the audience can be interpreted either as tedium (threat) or misunderstanding of the topic (non-threat). However, some individuals tend to display more anxiety and constant biasness than others. Generally, nonanxious individuals are more positive than their anxious counterparts and tend to interpret negative and positive feedback as beneficial towards building experience (Taylor, Bomyea, Amir, & Emotion, 2011). Interpretations are often ranked by individuals on the basis of likeliness or not to same situation depending culture of the agents of response (Hofmann, Asnnani, & Hinton, 2010; Huppert, Foa, Furr, Filip, & Mathews, 2003). In addition, covariance analysis indicates that composite score of a negative affect varies with group differences. It is higher in teenagers than in adults who seem optimistic (Wenzel & Holt, 2002). However, these research studies resonate on negative interpretation bias for a social event of ambiguous nature. These growing numbers of studies suggest that individuals who are socially anxious are negative in interpreting social ambiguous interactions. Despite this, many questions remain unanswered on how social anxiety contributes to interpretation bias. For instance, is every biased interpretation specific to a form of social anxiety, or general depression? Notwithstanding, it would be interesting to establish the basis of determining through evidence how the negative biases relate with positive and negative occurrences. In addition, it is essential to test on the applicability of the written finding on a practical and more ecological scenario such as social interactive forums. Often, social research methodology based only on written literature is limited as it restricts understanding of the components of interrelating variables of the study and may not contain relevance of the practical world (Festa & Ginsburg, 2011). Among the above resent studies, only Vassilopoulos has applied social interaction forums for participants where nonverbal and verbal cues are noted down (Vassilopoulos, 2011). The participants were paired with each asking the other a pre-written set of questions at a time interval and the answers tested for consistency. At the end, a perceived acceptance index was calculated form a combination of responses obtained. Interestingly, nonanxious participants rated the confederate as more accepting than the socially anxious counterparts. The author then inferred that “socially anxious individuals construe others’ reactions more negatively than nonanxious participants” (Vassilopoulos, 2011). However, ambiguous feedback was not presented to the participants against the obvious. Thus, this necessitates the need to prove a hypothesis that individuals who are socially anxious are prone to negative biases interpretation of ambiguous social events than the nonanxious individuals (Huppert, Foa, Furr, Filip, & Mathews, 2003).

Basically, the current study scrutinizes two explicit questions. To begin with, it attempts to highlight on how social anxiety has a role on negative interpretation bias in a group of thirty participants comprising of dysphonic and high anxious traits. By matching dysphoria and trait anxiety, it is in order to attribute emerging differences to social anxiety levels and not general distress levels. Also, the research investigates on the possibility of interpretive biases being a component and specific to social interactions ambiguity for positive and negative feedbacks and how the results can be generalized and compared with the current literature on negative interpretative bias for different ages. Thus, the research is to validate the hypothesis that individuals who are socially anxious are prone to negative biases interpretation of ambiguous social events than the nonanxious who form part of the control experiment. If the findings prove that negative biased interpretation of social ambiguous events is definite to social anxiety, then differences in experimental groups should be maintained when comparing and contrasting the influence of social anxiety on interpretative response among different age bracket.

References

Amir, N., Beard, C., & Bower, E. (2005). Interpretation Bias and Social Anxiety. Cognitive Theraphy and Research, Vol. 29, No. 4. pp. 433-443.

Beard, C., & Amir, N. (2010). Negative interpretation bias mediates the effect of social anxiety on state anxiety. Cognitive Therapy and Research, Vol 34(3). pp 292-296.

Festa, C. C., & Ginsburg, G. S. (2011). Parental and peer predictions of social anxiety in youth. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, Vol 42(3). pp. 291-306.

Hofmann, S., Asnaani, A., & Hinton, D. E. (2010). Cultural aspects in social anxiety and social anxiety disorder. Depression and Anxiety, Vol 27(12). pp. 1117-1127.

Huppert, J. D., Foa, E. B., Furr, J. M., Filip, J. C., & Mathews, A. (2003). Interpretation bias in social anxiety: A Dimensional perspective. Cognitive Therapy and Research, Vol 27(5). pp. 569-577.

Taylor, C. T., Bomyea, J. & Amir, N., Emotion. (2011). Malleability of attentional bias for positive emotional information and anxiety vulnerability. American Psychological Association Vol 11(1). pp. 127-138.

Vassilopoulos, S. P. (2011). Interpretation bias for facial expressions in high and low socially anxious individuals: Effects of stimulus duration. Hellenic Journal of Psychology, Vol 8(1). pp. 44-65.

Wenzel, A., & Holt, C. S. (2002). Memory bias against threat in social phobia. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, Vol 41(1). pp. 73-79.