PUB - Publikationen an der Universität Bielefeld

The goal of the present study was to compare 2 cognitive assessment methods for social anxiety: a thought listing and a self‐report method. The focus of this study was on the convergent and divergent validity of these methods using a multi‐trait multi‐method approach. Furthermore, treatment sensitivity was explored. Fifty‐eight patients with social phobia completed thought listings followed by 2 different social stress tasks before and after an exposure group treatment (n = 33), or following a waiting period (n = 25). One task consisted of speaking in front of 2 confederates while the other task involved initiating a conversation with an opposite‐sex confederate. Two questionnaires measuring positive and negative self‐statements regarding public speaking and social interactions were also completed. To compare the balance of positive and negative thoughts, the State of Mind ratio [positive thoughts/(positive+negative thoughts)] was calculated for both cognitive assessment methods. Results demonstrate that methods related to social interaction anxiety showed better convergent validity than methods related to public speaking anxiety; however, public speaking methods captured treatment effects better than methods related to social interaction anxiety. This study questions the common assumption that different cognitive assessment methods measure the same construct.