Comparing and Contrasting Fears of Positive and Negative Evaluation as Facets of Social Anxiety

Comparing and Contrasting Fears of Positive and Negative Evaluation

as Facets of Social Anxiety

Justin W. Weeks

Tejal A. Jakatdar

Richard G. Heimberg

Adult Anxiety Clinic of Temple University

Abstract

            Cognitive-behavioral theorists have proposed that fear of negative evaluation (FNE) is the core feature of social anxiety (Clark & Wells, 1995; Rapee & Heimberg, 1997). However, emerging evidence supports the notion that fear of evaluation in general is important in social anxiety, including fear of positive evaluation (FPE) as well as negative evaluation (e.g., see Weeks, Heimberg, & Rodebaugh, 2008a; Weeks, Heimberg, Rodebaugh, & Norton, 2008b). The purposes of the present study were to test several new hypotheses related to this expanded conceptualization of social anxiety, as well as to replicate the two-factor structural model consisting of separate factors for fears of positive and negative evaluation originally reported by Weeks et al. (2008a). The present findings further support FPE and FNE as distinct latent constructs. FPE and FNE related similarly to social anxiety but demonstrated unique relationships with several social anxiety-related constructs and emerged as distinct from several discriminant constructs with strong thematic overlap to FPE/FNE. The findings from the present study provide additional support for the hypothesis that fear of evaluation in general is important in social anxiety.

Comparing and Contrasting Fears of Positive and Negative Evaluation

as Facets of Social Anxiety

Cognitive-behavioral theorists have labeled fear of negative evaluation a core feature of social anxiety (e.g., Clark & Wells, 1995; Rapee & Heimberg, 1997), and extensive empirical support has been obtained in support of this notion (e.g., Coles, Turk, Heimberg, & Fresco, 2001; Hackmann, Surawy, & Clark, 1998; Horley, Williams, Gonsalvez, & Gordon, 2004; Mansell & Clark, 1999). More recently, Weeks and colleagues (Weeks, Heimberg, & Rodebaugh, 2008a; Weeks, Heimberg, Rodebaugh, & Norton, 2008b) have hypothesized that fear of evaluation in general is important in social anxiety, including fears of both positive and negative evaluation.

Fear of positive evaluation (FPE) consists of the expectation that others may evaluate one positively, feelings of apprehension about others’ positive evaluations of oneself, and distress over these evaluations (Weeks et al., 2008a). This construct is distinct from, albeit strongly related to, the constructs of social anxiety and fear of negative evaluation (FNE). Specifically, FPE pertains to the sense of dread associated with being evaluated favorably and publicly, which necessitates a direct social comparison of the self to others and therefore causes an individual to feel conspicuous and “in the spotlight.” In contrast, social anxiety pertains to affective reactions to these situations, and FNE pertains to the sense of dread associated with being evaluated unfavorably while anticipating or participating in a social situation.

Preliminary support for this expanded conceptualization of fear of evaluation in social anxiety has been obtained in several undergraduate samples (Weeks et al., 2008a; 2008b; Weeks, Norton, & Heimberg, in press). FPE correlates strongly and positively with FNE, and both constructs correlate strongly with social anxiety (Weeks et al., 2008a; 2008b). However, initial findings also suggest that FPE is distinct from FNE. FPE accounted for unique variance in the prediction of social interaction anxiety and fear of public scrutiny above and beyond that accounted for by FNE (Weeks et al., 2008a; 2008b). Furthermore, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of the combined straightforwardly worded items from self-report measures of FPE and FNE in an undergraduate sample suggested that a two-factor model (i.e., separate factors for FPE and FNE) fit the data well and was superior to a single-factor model. The two factors were highly correlated, suggesting that a higher-order fear of evaluation factor may be present. However, this factor solution has yet to be cross-validated in an independent sample (Weeks et al., 2008a).

Fears of positive and negative evaluation have also demonstrated specific relationships with social anxiety, which are not accounted for by relationships with other types of anxiety/negative affect. For example, FNE exhibited lesser relationships with worry, anxiety sensitivity, and depression than with social anxiety in a sample of patients with social anxiety disorder (Weeks et al., 2005). FPE has demonstrated the same pattern of specificity in several undergraduate samples (Weeks et al., 2008a; 2008b). Indeed, FPE related more strongly to fear of public scrutiny and social interaction anxiety than to symptoms of several non-social anxiety disorders (i.e., generalized anxiety disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, panic disorder) or with overall levels of anxiety and stress (Weeks et al., 2008a; 2008b).

Finally, FPE related positively to discomfort associated with receiving positive social feedback and negatively to perception of the accuracy of that feedback; in contrast, FNE was not related to either discomfort associated with, or perceived accuracy of, positive social feedback. Given previous findings which suggest that FNE is associated with a negatively-biased mental representation of the self (e.g., Coles et al., 2001; Hackmann et al., 1998), the findings of Weeks and colleagues suggest that social anxiety may be characterized by a self-image simultaneously biased by indicators of positive and negative aspects of the self. However, in contrast to the bias involved in negative aspects of the self-image (i.e., FNE), which are magnified in the mental representation, FPE may lead to a minimization of positive aspects of the self (e.g., socially anxious individuals may possess a self-image that specifies that they are nervous-looking and are not fun to be around, respectively) (see Weeks et al., 2008b).

Theoretical Framework for Fear of Evaluation in Social Anxiety

This model of fear of evaluation in social anxiety is consistent with accumulating findings in the literature that underscore a general relationship between social anxiety and diminished/impaired positive psychological experiences, such as anticipation of more frequent and intense negative emotional reactions to positive social events (Gilboa-Schechtman, Franklin, & Foa, 2000) and decreased concomitant positive affect and other positive psychological experiences (e.g., curiosity), even upon controlling for depressive symptoms (Kashdan, 2007). Also consistent with the notion of FPE, Wallace and Alden (1995; 1997) and colleagues (Alden, Mellings, & Laposa, 2001) have reported that socially anxious individuals worry that positive evaluation of their performance raises the social standards by which they will be evaluated in the future, whereas they do not believe that their typical performance will change for the better. As a result, they predict that positive evaluation by others will ultimately result in failure.

This model is also consistent in part with the evolutionary account of social anxiety put forth by Gilbert (2001), who proposed that social anxiety is an evolutionary mechanism that facilitates non-violent group interactions. With respect to FNE, Gilbert proposed that avoiding negative evaluation would have been adaptive in demonstrating to others that one is worthy of social investments and in avoiding conflict with individuals who ranked higher on a social hierarchy. Recent findings demonstrating that social anxiety is associated with significant reductions in testosterone levels among human males in response to social defeat (but not success) suggest that social anxiety is indeed related to submissiveness in competitive social contexts (Maner, Miller, Schmidt, & Eckel, 2008) and provide direct support for Gilbert’s social anxiety model. Relevant to FPE, Gilbert suggested that socially anxious individuals would also fear increases in status that could lead to conflict with more powerful others. Gilbert further suggested that socially anxious individuals may fear that they will not be able to maintain or defend social gains in the future and dubbed (p. 742) this concept the “fear of doing well.”

In essence, social threat could entail any situation in which the person might receive either positive or negative evaluation (see Weeks et al., 2008a). This notion is indirectly supported by findings that social anxiety is positively associated with public self-consciousness, one’s general tendency to consider his or her public presence (Bruch, Gorsky, Collins, & Berger, 1989; Hope & Heimberg, 1988). Prior to outlining the hypotheses of the present study, we briefly review findings on several social anxiety-related constructs relevant to our model.

Empirical Links between Fears of Evaluation and Other Social Anxiety-Relevant Constructs

Social anxiety disorder has been characterized by low trait levels of positive affect and high trait levels of negative affect (Brown, Chorpita, & Barlow, 1998); social interaction anxiety, in particular, has been associated with low positive affect (Hughes et al., 2006). Previous findings suggest FNE is a partially heritable trait related to other dimensions that may also be related to social anxiety (e.g., trait anxiousness, submissiveness, social avoidance; see Stein, Jang, & Livesley, 2002); similarly, FPE is conceptualized as a trait, consistent with the finding that scores obtained on a measure of FPE remain stable over time (see Weeks et al., 2008a).

Consistent with Gilbert’s (2001) psycho-evolutionary model, submissive behavior and social comparison tendencies have been linked to social anxiety. Schneier, Heimberg, Belzer, and Liebowitz (2006) reported that both increased submissive behavior and lower perceived social status were associated with greater social anxiety and disability in patients with social anxiety disorder, as well as healthy controls, and previous findings support a positive relationship between FPE and self-reported submissive behaviors (Weeks et al., 2008b). Findings pertaining to the relationships between submissive behaviors and FNE, as well as between social comparison tendencies, positive and negative affect, and FPE/FNE, have not been reported. However, based on the proposition that both types of evaluation are central to social anxiety, we expected that both FPE and FNE would relate positively to trait negative affect and submissive behaviors and negatively to trait positive affect and social self-rankings.

Horner (1969) proposed the construct fear of success, the disposition to become anxious about achieving success due to expectations of negative consequences of succeeding, as a means of explaining putative gender differences in achievement motivation. Horner (1969) asserted that women are motivated to avoid success when they expect negative consequences (e.g., rejection by others, social isolation, feelings of being unfeminine) as a result of adopting stereotypic masculine gender roles which can facilitate occupational success (e.g., being competitive or assertive) yet which traditionally conflict with stereotypic feminine gender roles. Fear of success has received equivocal support (see Tresemer, 1976, for a review). However, relevant to the present study, fear of success related positively to anxiety (Gelbort & Winer, 1985). Given the thematic overlap between fear of success and FPE, examining the inter-relationships between these constructs and social anxiety is necessary to determine whether they are distinct.

Horner’s hypothesis that significant gender differences will exist with respect to fear of success marks a critical distinction between the constructs of fear of success and FPE. No a priori reason exists to suggest that FPE would vary by gender, and no gender differences in FPE have been reported to date (Weeks et al., 2008a; 2008b). Thus, some indirect evidence has already been obtained in support of a distinction between FPE and fear of success. However, it has been argued that fear of success can be experienced by both men and women (e.g., Miller, 1994; Monahan, Kuhn, & Shaver, 1974; Schuster, 1955), and a direct assessment of the relationship/distinction between fear of success and FPE is necessary to conduct a valid test of discriminant/incremental validity. In addition, despite its potential relevance to the study of social anxiety/fear of evaluation, no examination of the relationships between fear of success, FNE, and social anxiety has yet been reported; thus, these relationships were also examined.

Valentiner, Renner, and Smith (2008) have obtained preliminary findings demonstrating strong inter-relationships between social anxiety, low social self-esteem, and a preference for negative feedback about one’s social worth. Valentiner et al. interpret their findings as being consistent with self-verification theory (Swann, 1983; 1990), which asserts that individuals tend to seek out, prefer, and elicit information that is congruent with their self-image and tend to reject and fail to process information that is inconsistent with that image. This preference for congruent information may exist even when one’s self-image is negative, as is generally the case with social anxiety (e.g., see Jones, Briggs, & Smith, 1986; Leary & Kowalski, 1995). It is important to examine the distinction between FPE and a preference for negative feedback. Could FPE simply reflect a tendency to reject positive social feedback/prefer negative social feedback? Similarly, examining the relationship between a preference for positive social feedback and FNE could potentially provide useful information regarding the underlying mechanisms of FNE.

Summary of Study Hypotheses

We sought to test several new hypotheses generated on the basis of our fear of evaluation model of social anxiety, as well as to replicate the structural model originally reported by Weeks et al. (2008a). The following hypotheses were tested: (a) The two-factor fear of evaluation model originally reported by Weeks et al. (2008a) would successfully cross-validate in the current sample; (b) FPE and FNE would correlate positively with trait negative (social situation-specific) affect and negatively with trait positive (social situation-specific) affect, and these relationships would remain robust upon controlling for the alternative type of fear of evaluation; (c) FPE and FNE would correlate positively with submissive behaviors and negatively with social self-rankings; (d) FPE and FNE would each correlate more strongly with social anxiety than would fear of success; and (e) FPE and FNE would correlate more strongly with each other at the latent level than with preferences for positive or negative social feedback.

Method

Participants

            Participants in the present study were undergraduate psychology students at Temple University (N = 423) who received course credit for their participation. The majority were female (73.1%). In addition, 56.0% of participants were Caucasian, 20.0% were African American, 12.7% were Asian American, 10.5% were of other ethnicity, and 0.8% were of mixed ethnicity. Participants had a mean age of 19.55 years (SD = 2.73).

Measures

Fear of Positive Evaluation Scale (FPES; Weeks et al., 2008a). The 10-item FPES uses a 10-point Likert-type rating scale, ranging from 0 (not at all true) to 9 (very true). Two reverse-scored items are included (for the purpose of potentially detecting response biases) but are not utilized in the calculation of the FPES total score. The FPES has demonstrated strong internal consistency (all a’s > .80) and 5-week retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = .70) in undergraduate samples. Furthermore, the FPES has demonstrated strong convergent and discriminant validity (Weeks et al., 2008a; 2008b) as well as factorial validity in a series of CFAs (Weeks et al., 2008a) in several undergraduate samples. The FPES demonstrated good internal consistency in the present sample (a = .83).

The Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale-Straightforward Items (BFNE-S: Rodebaugh et al., 2004; Weeks et al., 2005). The BFNE (Leary, 1983) is a 12-item self-report measure of fear and distress related to negative evaluation from others. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (Not at all characteristic of me) to 5 (Extremely characteristic of me). Rodebaugh et al. (2004) and Weeks et al. (2005) have reported that the 8 straightforwardly-worded items are more reliable and valid indicators of fear of negative evaluation than the reverse-scored items in undergraduate and clinical samples, respectively. Consequently, Rodebaugh et al. and Weeks et al. have suggested utilizing only the 8 straightforward (-S) BFNE items to calculate the total score. The BFNE-S has demonstrated excellent internal consistency (all α’s > .92), factorial validity, and construct validity in undergraduate (Rodebaugh et al., 2004) and clinical (Weeks et al., 2005) samples. The 12-item BFNE was administered; however, only the BFNE-S items were utilized in the present analyses. The BFNE-S demonstrated excellent internal consistency in the present sample (a = .92).

            Measures of social anxiety.

The Social Phobia Scale (SPS; Mattick & Clarke, 1998). The SPS measures fear of public scrutiny and consists of 20 items which are scored on a 5-point Likert-type rating scale ranging from 0 (Not at all characteristic or true of me) to 4 (Extremely characteristic or true of me). The SPS has demonstrated strong internal consistency in clinical, community, and undergraduate samples (as range from .89 to .94) (Mattick & Clarke, 1998), and adequate retest reliability (r = .66) in a sample of undergraduates (Heimberg, Mueller, Holt, Hope, & Liebowitz, 1992). Furthermore, Mattick and Clarke (1998) reported that the SPS adequately discriminated among patients with anxiety disorders (social anxiety disorder, agoraphobia, simple phobia) and between individuals with social anxiety disorder and controls (undergraduate and community samples). The SPS demonstrated excellent internal consistency in the present sample (a = .93).

Social Interaction Anxiety Scale-Straightforward Items (SIAS-S; Rodebaugh, Woods, & Heimberg, 2007). The Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS; Mattick & Clarke, 1998) is a measure of anxiety in dyads and groups, and consists of 20 items that are scored on a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 (Not at all characteristic or true of me) to 4 (Extremely characteristic or true of me). Rodebaugh and colleagues have reported that the 17 straightforwardly-worded items of the SIAS are more valid indicators of social interaction anxiety than the reverse-scored items in both undergraduate and clinical samples. Consequently, Rodebaugh et al. suggested the scoring strategy of utilizing only the straightforward SIAS items to calculate the total score, thereby yielding a 17-item score, hereafter referred to as the SIAS-Straightforward (SIAS-S) score. The SIAS-S has demonstrated excellent internal consistency (α = .93) and factorial validity in undergraduate samples and has demonstrated strong construct validity in both undergraduate and clinical samples (Rodebaugh et al., 2007). The 20-item SIAS was administered; however, only the SIAS-S items were utilized here. The SIAS-S demonstrated excellent internal consistency in the present sample (a = .93).¹

Measures of affect, submissive behavior, and social comparison.

Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). The PANAS is comprised of two 10-item scales designed to assess positive affect and negative affect, respectively. The PANAS scales may be administered with different temporal instructions, including “right now” and “today.” Using such administration instructions, the scales have demonstrated excellent internal consistency (all αs > .85) and are largely uncorrelated (both rs < -.15). Furthermore, the positive affect scale has demonstrated positive correlations with items assessing pleasant states (e.g., joyful, pleasant, self-confident), whereas the negative affect scale has demonstrated positive correlations with measures of depression, general distress, and general dysfunction (Watson et al., 1988), providing support for the convergent validity of the scales. Participants were instructed to indicate the extent to which they experience the various positive and negative feelings listed in the PANAS while interacting with others in general. Both the positive and negative affect scales of the PANAS demonstrated good internal consistency in the present sample (as = .87 and .89, respectively).

The Submissive Behavior Scale (SBS; Gilbert & Allan, 1994). The SBS is a 16-item self-report measure that assesses involuntary submissive behaviors. The SBS was designed to explore the relationship of evolved mental mechanisms of social rank to psychopathology and was derived from an earlier measure (Buss & Craik, 1986). Sample SBS items include: “I agree that I am wrong even though I know I’m not” and “I avoid direct eye contact.” The SBS has demonstrated adequate internal consistency in both clinical and control (both αs > .74) samples (Schneier et al., 2006). Furthermore, the SBS correlated strongly with a clinician-administered measure of social anxiety, and patients with generalized social anxiety disorder obtained higher SBS scores than controls (Schneier et al., 2006), providing support for the construct validity of the scale. The SBS demonstrated good internal consistency in the present sample (a = .86).

The Social Comparison Rating Scale (SCRS; Allan & Gilbert, 1995). The SCRS is an 11-item self-report measure that assesses social comparison tendencies (i.e., tendencies to compare oneself to others), with lower SCRS scores reflecting lower social self-rankings. The SCRS total score has demonstrated excellent internal consistency in both undergraduate and clinical samples (both αs > .88; Allan & Gilbert, 1995). Consistent with theoretical models of social comparison, negative correlations have been reported between scores on the SCRS and various self-report indices of psychopathology (indicating that lower social self-rankings are associated with increased psychopathological symptoms), and clinical samples obtain lower social comparison scores than undergraduates (Allan & Gilbert, 1995). The instructions of the SCRS were modified for the purposes of the present study, specifying that respondents rate how they generally compare themselves to others of the same gender (as opposed to others), as we expected that social comparison tendencies would vary systematically by gender (e.g., we expected that males would be more concerned about their strength relative to other males rather than to others in general). The SCRS demonstrated excellent internal consistency in the present sample (a = .93).

Measures of other (discriminant) constructs.

The Fear of Success Scale (FOSS; Zuckerman & Allison, 1976). The FOSS is a widely used measure of fear of success, consisting of 27 items (11 of which are reverse-scored) rated using a yes-no format. The FOSS related positively to a projective measure of fear of success and negatively to a measure of achievement motivation, providing support for its convergent validity. Furthermore, individuals with higher FOSS scores performed less well on an anagram test, attributed success to more external factors, and attributed failure to more internal factors than individuals with lower scores (Zuckerman & Allison, 1976).

Metzler and Conroy (2004) conducted a series of CFAs examining the FOSS in a sample of undergraduate athletes and found that a structural model based on the original scoring strategy demonstrated inadequate fit. Although they suggested that their findings could be attributable to poor psychometric properties of the reverse-scored FOSS items, Metzler and Conroy did not report on an alternative model with separate factors for straightforward and reverse-scored items. Consistent with Metzler and Conroy’s findings, the internal consistency of the FOSS in the present sample was poor (a = .54). However, the 16 straightforward FOSS items demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (a = .78). Thus, only responses to the straightforward FOSS items were utilized here, henceforth referred to as the FOSS-Straightforward scale (FOSS-S).

The Feedback Seeking Questionnaire-Social subscale-Dimensional format (FSQ-S-D). The Feedback Seeking Questionnaire-Social subscale (FSQ-S; Valentiner et al., 2008) is an 18-item self-report measure of preference for negative feedback about one’s social value. Three social domains are assessed by the FSQ-S: social affection, social friendship, and social intimacy. Respondents are presented with six self-referent questions for each of the three domains, three of which are framed negatively and three of which are framed positively. Respondents are then instructed to read all of the questions for each section and to select the two self-referent questions from each domain that they would most prefer an individual whom the respondent considers to be a close other to answer. Scores on the FSQ-S are calculated by totaling the number of negatively-framed self-referent questions that respondents endorse. The FSQ-S has demonstrated good internal consistency in an undergraduate sample (a = .84). Furthermore, it has been shown to correlate positively with social anxiety and negatively with social self-esteem. Given that the forced-choice response format of the FSQ-S may result in missing data (see Valentiner et al., 2008), we modified the FSQ-S to include a Likert-type rating scale ranging from 0 (I would strongly prefer that they not answer this question about me) to 4 (I would strongly prefer that they answer this question about me) and instructed respondents to rate each question with respect to whether or not they would prefer a close other to answer it.

Procedure

Participants completed the above measures in partial fulfillment of research requirements for their Introductory Psychology course. Only those participants who responded to all straightforward items of the FPES and the BFNE (n = 419; 99.05% of the initial sampling pool) were included in the present study.

CFA was performed using the structural equation modeling software program AMOS 6.0 (Arbuckle, 2005). In determining factor structure, global model fit was evaluated using the: (a) Tucker-Lewis incremental fit index (TLI; Tucker & Lewis, 1973), (b) comparative fit index (CFI, Bentler, 1990), and (c) root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA, Steiger & Lind, 1980). The magnitude of these indices was evaluated with the aid of recommendations by Hu and Bentler (1999).

Results

Preliminary analyses

            Means and standard deviations for participants’ responses to all questionnaires are displayed in Table 1. Both FPES scores (skewness = 0.25, SE ­= .12; kurtosis = -0.18, SE = 0.24) and BFNE-S scores (skewness = 0.37, SE ­= .12; kurtosis = -0.45, SE = 0.24) were normally distributed in the overall sample. Furthermore, no gender differences were found for either FPES, F (1, 416) = 0.04, p = .84, or BFNE-S, F (1, 416) = 2.33, p = .13, scores.²

Evaluating the distinction between FPE and FNE utilizing confirmatory factor analysis

We attempted to replicate the two-factor model originally reported by Weeks et al. (2008a), in which all 8 straightforward FPES items loaded onto a single latent factor (i.e., fear of positive evaluation) and all 8 straightforward BFNE items loaded onto a single, correlated latent factor (i.e., fear of negative evaluation). We also compared this model to a nested single-factor model with all straightforward FPES and BFNE items loading onto a single latent factor.

The correlated two-factor model demonstrated adequate fit (CFI = .95; TLI = .94; RMSEA = .05) and provided better fit to the data (χ² (1) = 673.67, p < .001) than the single-factor solution, which demonstrated poor fit (CFI = .74; TLI = .66; RMSEA = .14). All loadings from this model were statistically significant (p < .01).  See Figure 1. Similar to the findings of Weeks et al. (2008a), the two factors were strongly and positively correlated (r = .49, p < .001), suggesting that a higher-order fear of evaluation factor may be present. However, given that at least three lower-order factors are necessary to adequately test a higher-order confirmatory factor solution, we were unable to evaluate the fit of such a solution in the present study.

Relationships between fears of evaluation, negative affect, and positive affect

            A Bonferroni correction (.05/4 = .0125) was applied, which controlled for the number of comparisons between FPE, FNE, and (social interaction-specific) negative and positive affect. As expected, FPE and FNE were both positively correlated with negative affect (PANAS-NA), and negatively correlated with positive affect (PANAS-PA) (see Table 2). Moreover, as hypothesized, the relationships between FPE and both negative and positive affect remained robust upon controlling for FNE (r = .20, p < .001; r = -.12, p = .014, respectively), and the relationships between FNE and both negative and positive affect remained robust upon controlling for FPE (r = .44, p < .001; r = -.18, p < .001, respectively). Exploratory significance tests (Meng, Rosenthal, & Rubin, 1992) were conducted to determine whether FNE related more strongly than FPE to negative/positive affect. FNE related more strongly than FPE to negative affect (z = 3.53, p < .001) but not positive affect (z = -0.78, p = .44).

Relationships between FPE, FNE, submissive behaviors, and social comparison

            Two standard regression equations were tested to examine whether: a) submissive behaviors were positively predicted by both FPE and FNE, and b) social self-rankings were negatively predicted by both FPE and FNE. FPES and BFNE-S scores were entered as simultaneous predictors in both equations. The SBS score was the criterion variable in the first equation, the SCRS total score the criterion variable in the second. Consistent with hypotheses, FPE and FNE were both significant predictors of submissive behaviors and social comparison tendencies, and all of these effects were in the expected directions (see Table 3). These effects were large (Cohen’s f² = .82) for predicting submissive behaviors, and small (Cohen’s f² = .19) for predicting social comparison tendencies (Cohen, 1988).

Distinction between Fears of Evaluation and Success

Both FPE and FNE exhibited small positive correlations with fear of success (FOSS-S scores; see Table 2). Consistent with hypothesis, significance tests (Meng et al., 1992) revealed that FPE and FNE each correlated significantly more strongly with fear of public scrutiny and social interaction anxiety than did fear of success (all zs > 4.94, all ps < .001).

Distinction between FPE, FNE, and Preferences for Negative and Positive Social Feedback

            Before examining the correlations between fears of evaluation and preferences for positive and negative social feedback, additional CFAs were conducted. Specifically, we sought to test a model consisting of four latent correlated factors (i.e., fear of positive evaluation, fear of negative evaluation, preference for negative social feedback, and preference for positive social feedback). However, to test such a model, we first needed to evaluate the factor structure of the FSQ-S-D, as no findings have yet been reported on the factor structure of this measure.

Evaluating the factor structure of the FSQ-S-D.

We initially tested a confirmatory structural model consisting of two correlated latent factors, with the 9 items pertaining to preference for positive social feedback loading onto one latent factor (i.e., preference for positive feedback; PPF) and the 9 items pertaining to preference for negative social feedback loading onto the other (i.e., preference for negative feedback; PNF). This model was then compared to an alternative solution with all 18 FSQ-S-D items loading onto a single factor, but neither model demonstrated adequate fit (both CFIs < .92; both TLIs < .89; both RMSEAs > .10). Given that the FSQ-S-D is comprised of 9 pairs of opposing feedback items and that respondents were instructed to rate the extent to which self-oriented feedback regarding each item would be preferred, it seemed reasonable to assume that the FSQ-S-D item pairs would overlap with respect to measurement error (i.e., respondents would likely be subject to similar response tendencies when responding to items pertaining to being good at intimacy vs. not being good at intimacy). Thus, we evaluated two additional confirmatory structural models.

The first of these models consisted of the two correlated factors reflecting preferences for negative and positive feedback, but with the residuals of each pair of feedback-related items (i.e., positive vs. negative) allowed to correlate as a means of modeling error variance. Similarly, the second alternative model tested consisted of a single-factor solution including all 18 FSQ-S-D items, with the residuals of each pair of feedback-related items (i.e., positive vs. negative) allowed to correlate. The two-factor, correlated-residual structural model demonstrated adequate fit (CFI = .95; TLI = .93; RMSEA = .08) and provided a better fit to the data (χ² (1) = 1208.75, p < .001) than the single-factor solution with correlated residuals, which demonstrated poor fit (CFI = .79; TLI = .71; RMSEA = .17).³ All loadings from the two-factor, correlated-residual structural model were statistically significant (p < .01). The two preference for feedback factors were highly correlated (r = .76). The internal consistency of the items for both the PNF and PPF factors was excellent (both as > .95).

            Latent distinction between fears of evaluation and feedback preferences.

            We next sought to examine whether FPE and FNE would emerge as distinct from PNF and PPF as latent factors. Thus, we tested a confirmatory structural model consisting of four correlated, latent factors which represented an integration of: (a) the two-factor fear of evaluation model of Weeks and colleagues (2008a), and (b) the two-factor preference for feedback model with correlated residuals reported above. Consistent with hypothesis, this four-factor model demonstrated adequate fit (CFI = .95; TLI = .94; RMSEA = .05) in the present sample.⁴ All loadings from this model were statistically significant (p < .01).

Latent correlations among the two fear of evaluation factors and the two preference for social feedback factors are displayed in Table 4. FPE correlated significantly and negatively with a preference for positive social feedback, whereas FNE correlated significantly and negatively with a preference for negative social feedback. In addition, FPE also correlated negatively with a preference for negative feedback. Most importantly, FPE and FNE correlated significantly more strongly with each other than with preferences for either positive or negative social feedback (both zs > -4.09, both ps < .001), providing additional support for the distinction of FPE and FNE from preferences for positive/negative feedback. Indeed, the relationship between FPE and FNE was more than twice the strength of any of the relationships between either of the fear of evaluation factors and the feedback-preference factors.

            Distinction between feedback preferences and other constructs.

Bivariate correlations of scores obtained on the two preference for social feedback subscales and all other measures are displayed in Table 2 (an overall correction of p = .01 was applied). PPF and PNF related negatively to both fear of public scrutiny and social interaction anxiety. Interestingly, both PPF and PNF related positively to social interaction specific-positive affect (PANAS-PA scores) and social self-rankings (SCRS scores) but did not relate significantly to social interaction specific-negative affect (PANAS-NA scores); both preferences for feedback related negatively to submissive behavior (although note that the relationship between PPF and SBS scores was not significant upon correction; p < .04) and fear of success. Moreover, the overall relationships between PPF/PNF and social anxiety and FPE remained significant upon controlling for positive affect, and vice versa (all partial rs > |.13|, all ps < .01).⁵ The relationships between PPF/PNF and positive affect also remained significant upon controlling for FNE (both partial rs > .18, both ps < .001), although the relationship between PNF and FNE did not remain significant upon controlling for positive affect (partial r = -.09, p = .10).

Lastly, follow-up analyses were conducted to examine whether fears of evaluation accounted for unique variance in social anxiety above and beyond that accounted for by preferences for social feedback, and vice versa. Specifically, four hierarchical regression equations were tested. For the first two equations, the PPF and PNF subscales of the FSQ-S-D were entered in the first step, and the FPES and BFNE-S scores were entered in the second step, with the SPS total score and the SIAS-S score as the criterion variables. Both FPE and FNE significantly improved (all ps < .001 for both predictors in Step 2 of both equations) the prediction of social anxiety above and beyond PPF and PNF (both R² Ds > .38, both Fs > 137.95, both ps < .001). For the next two hierarchical regression equations, FPES and BFNE-S scores were entered in the first step, and scores on the PPF and PNF subscales of the FSQ-S-D were entered in the second step, with SPS total scores and SIAS-S scores as the criterion variables. Prediction of SPS scores was significantly improved by inclusion of PPF and PNF in the second step (R² D = .02, F = 5.66, p = .004); PPF was a significant unique predictor (p = .02), but PNF was not (p = .82). Prediction of SIAS-S scores was not significantly improved by inclusion of either PPF or PNF (both ps > .27).⁶

Discussion

The purposes of the present study were to test several hypotheses related to fear of evaluation in social anxiety, as well as to replicate the two-factor fear of evaluation model originally reported by Weeks et al. (2008a). Several analyses were conducted to compare and contrast FPE and FNE within the context of various social anxiety-relevant constructs. Given that previous findings (Weeks et al., 2008a; 2008b) suggested that social anxiety relates to fears of both positive and negative evaluation, we expected that FPE and FNE would exhibit similar relationships with social anxiety-related constructs. Additional analyses were conducted to provide information about the relationships of FPE and FNE to several discriminant constructs.

All hypotheses in the present study received support. First, the two-factor fear of evaluation model originally reported by Weeks and colleagues (2008a) successfully cross-validated and demonstrated superior fit relative to an alternative single-factor model. These findings corroborate the original position of Weeks et al. that fears of positive and negative evaluation are distinct constructs. That these constructs were highly correlated at the latent level provides further support for a higher-order fear of evaluation factor.

In line with previous findings that social anxiety is characterized by high levels of negative affect and low levels of positive affect (Brown et al., 1998), FPE and FNE both related positively to social interaction-specific trait negative affect and negatively to social interaction-specific trait positive affect. These relationships remained robust to partialling out the alternative fear of evaluation (although FNE related more strongly than FPE to negative affect). In addition, FPE and FNE both related positively to submissive behaviors and negatively to social self-rankings; indeed, both evaluative fears accounted for unique variance in these constructs.

The present study also provided support for the distinction between FPE/FNE and several thematically-related discriminant constructs. First, FPE and FNE each related more strongly to fear of public scrutiny and social interaction anxiety than did fear of success. Second, CFA revealed that FPE, FNE, preference for negative social feedback, and preference for positive social feedback were factorially distinct. Importantly, the relationship between FPE and FNE was more than twice the strength of any of the relationships between either of the fear of evaluation factors and the feedback-preference factors, providing additional support for the distinction of FPE and FNE from preferences for positive/negative social feedback. Nevertheless, examination of these latter correlations is revealing. FPE correlated negatively with a preference for positive feedback, whereas FNE correlated negatively with a preference for negative social feedback. In addition, FPE also correlated negatively with a preference for negative feedback. Thus, individuals endorsing higher levels of FPE preferred not to receive feedback/be evaluated in general, regardless of the nature of the feedback. FNE, on the other hand, was more specifically related to a preference for negative feedback.

The present findings have implications for the theoretical conceptualization of social anxiety. Specifically, consistent with accumulating findings in the literature which highlight a general relationship between social anxiety and diminished/impaired positive psychological experiences (e.g., Gilboa-Schechtman et al., 2000; Kashdan, 2007), our findings suggest that fears of both positive and negative evaluation are associated with tendencies to experience decreased positive affect and increased negative affect while interacting with others. FPE may result in decreased positive affect/increased negative affect in response to positive social feedback because of concerns about having caused others to develop an overall impression of oneself that is socially threatening to more dominant others (i.e., “too good”), whereas FNE may result in decreased positive affect/increased negative affect in response to negative social feedback due to concerns of having caused others to develop an overall impression of oneself as being unworthy of social investments (i.e., “bad/not good enough”); both of these aversive social impressions carry the threat of social exclusion/rejection.

Moreover, psycho-evolutionary accounts propose that social anxiety is a potentially adaptive mechanism which prompts avoidance of conflict with more (socially) dominant others within competitive social environments (see Gilbert, 2001). Such accounts are consistent with previous findings of positive relationships between social anxiety and both social comparison and submissive behavioral tendencies (e.g., Schneier et al., 2006). Likewise, the present findings suggest that fears of both positive and negative evaluation are uniquely associated with decreased social self-rankings and increased behavioral submissiveness (as assessed via self-report). Thus, FPE and FNE are distinctly tied to cognitive and behavioral responses to social threat which could be adaptive in facilitating avoidance of conflict/social exclusion within the context of socially-competitive environments. 

The present findings also provide information regarding relationships between social anxiety and several constructs which had not previously been extensively examined in relation to social anxiety. For example, given that fear of success, the disposition to become anxious about achieving success because of expectations of negative consequences of succeeding, correlated significantly (albeit modestly) with social anxiety and FPE/FNE in the present sample, future studies examining the relationship between social anxiety and fear of success/achievement motivation appear warranted. Moreover, FPE was distinct from tendencies to prefer negative social feedback/to find positive social feedback to be discordant with one’s own self-image and therefore reject it, and FNE was found to be distinct from tendencies to prefer positive social feedback/to find negative social feedback to be discordant with one’s own self-image.

The negative latent correlations of the fear of evaluation factors and the preference for social feedback factors suggest that FPE and FNE may jointly be associated with an overall desire to not receive social feedback/be evaluated at all. The present findings are consistent with the original position of Weeks and colleagues (2008a), in suggesting that socially anxious individuals may attach fundamental importance to remaining inconspicuous, as either positive or negative appraisals could result in the experience of anxiety. This is consistent with the finding that PPF and PNF each related negatively to fear of public scrutiny and social interaction anxiety in the present study. Intriguingly, both PPF and PNF related positively to social interaction specific-positive affect and social self-rankings but did not relate significantly to social interaction specific-negative affect. Although these correlational findings preclude causal interpretations, it is interesting to speculate that individuals who tend to generally feel “good” (i.e., to experience positive affect) while in social situations and who view themselves positively in comparison to others may tend to have a greater overall interest in receiving social feedback. Such individuals may have an overall positive and stable mental representation of the self (see Rapee & Heimberg, 1997) and may therefore be less sensitive to criticism from others. Perhaps these individuals continue to view themselves positively/experience positive emotions despite potential receipt of negative (or positive) feedback from others; given that these individuals would not be concerned that social feedback could adversely impact their self-image, there would be no aversive consequence to learning what others think of them. In contrast, individuals who do not tend to feel “good” in social situations, and/or who view themselves less positively in comparison to others, may tend to have a social self-image which is less stable/more susceptible to distortion via external feedback. Furthermore, both preferences for feedback related negatively to submissive behavior tendencies and fear of success.

Thus, PPF and PNF related similarly to all constructs assessed in the present study, but these relationships were distinct from those relationships found between social anxiety/fear of evaluation and the other comparison constructs, and this pattern of relationships was not attributable to overlap between preferences for social feedback, social anxiety, fear of evaluation, and positive affect. The distinct pattern of relationships across these constructs provides additional support for the separation between fears of positive/negative evaluation and preferences for positive/negative social feedback as cognitive facets of social anxiety. In addition, the strong latent relationship between preferences for positive and negative feedback suggests that a higher order preference for social feedback factor may be present, but evaluation of that possibility awaits further research.

Lastly, hierarchical regression analyses revealed that FPE and FNE accounted for unique variance of social anxiety above and beyond that already accounted for by preferences for positive and negative feedback. In addition, PPF (but not PNF) accounted for unique variance of public scrutiny fear above and beyond FPE and FNE, although neither PPF nor PNF significantly improved prediction of social interaction anxiety. These findings support the potential roles of FPE and FNE in the maintenance of social anxiety, as well as that of PPF with respect to maintaining fear of public scrutiny. The present findings, as well as those reported previously by Valentiner and colleagues (2008), suggest that continued examination of preferences for social feedback and their relations to social anxiety are an important area of future research.

Several limitations to the present study must be acknowledged. First, the present data were obtained in undergraduate samples. Although our findings provide support for all hypotheses in the present study, examining the generalizability of these findings to clinical samples is an important next step in testing the relationships of fears of evaluation to social anxiety. Second, it is important to extend the study of fears of evaluation through the inclusion of multimethod data sources, including clinician-administered measures, as well as behavioral and physiological indicators, of social anxiety.  

References

Alden, L. E., Mellings, T. M. B., & Laposa, J. M. (2004). Framing social information and generalized social phobia. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 42, 585–600.

Allan, S., & Gilbert, P. (1995). A social comparison scale: Psychometric properties and relationship to psychopathology. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 293-299.

Arbuckle, J.L. (2005). Amos (Version 6) [Computer Program]. Chicago: SPSS.

Bentler, P. M. (1990). Fit indexes, Lagrange multipliers, constraint changes and incomplete data in structural models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 163-172.

Brown, T.A., Chorpita, B.F., & Barlow, D.H. (1998). Structural relationships among dimensions of the DSM-IV anxiety and mood disorders and dimensions of negative affect, positive affect, and autonomic arousal. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 107, 179-192.

Bruch, M.A., Gorsky, J.M., Collins, T.M., & Berger, P.A. (1989). Shyness and sociability reexamined: A multicomponent analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 904-915.

Buss, D.M., & Craik, K.H. (1986). Acts, dispositions, and clinical assessment: The psychopathology of everyday conduct. Clinical Psychology Review, 6, 387-406.

Clark, D.M., & Wells, A. (1995). A cognitive model of social phobia. In R.G. Heimberg, M.R. Liebowitz, D.A. Hope, & F.R. Schneier (Eds.), Social phobia: Diagnosis, assessment, and treatment (pp. 69-93). New York: Guilford Press.

Cohen, J. (1988).  Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2^nd ed.).  Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Coles, M.E., Turk, C.L., Heimberg, R.G., & Fresco, D.M. (2001).  Effects of varying levels of anxiety within social situations: Relationship to memory perspective and attributions in social phobia. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 39, 651-665.

Gelbort, K.R., & Winer, J.L. (1985). Fear of success and fear of failure: A multitrait-multimethod validation study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1009-1014.

Gilbert, P. (2001). Evolution and social anxiety: The role of attraction, social competition, and social hierarchies. The Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 24, 723-751.

Gilbert, P., & Allan, S. (1994). Assertiveness, submissive behaviour and social comparison. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 33, 295-306.

Gilboa-Schechtman, E., Franklin, M.E., & Foa, E.B. (2000). Anticipated reactions to social events: Differences among individuals with generalized social phobia, obsessive compulsive disorder, and nonanxious controls. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 24, 731-746.

Hackman, A., Surawy, C., & Clark, D.M. (1998). Seeing yourself through others’ eyes: A study of spontaneously occurring images in social phobia. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 26, 3-12.

Heimberg, R. G., Mueller, G. P., Holt, C. S., Hope, D. A., & Liebowitz, M. R. (1992). Assessment of anxiety in social interaction and being observed by others: The Social Interaction Anxiety Scale and the Social Phobia Scale. Behavior Therapy, 23, 53-73.

Hope, D.A., & Heimberg, R.G. (1988). Public and private self-consciousness and social phobia. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52, 626-639.

Horley, K., Williams, L.M., Gonsalvez, C., & Gordon, E. (2004). Face to face: Visual scanpath evidence for abnormal processing of facial expressions in social phobia. Psychiatry Research, 127, 43-53.

Horner, M. (1969). Fail: Bright women. Psychology Today, 3, 36-38.

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

Hughes, A.A., Heimberg, R.G., Coles, M.E., Gibb, B.E., Liebowitz, M.R., & Schneier, F.R. (2006). Relations of the factors of the tripartite model of anxiety and depression to types of social anxiety. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44, 1629-1641.

Jones, W.H., Briggs, S.R., & Smith, T.G. (1986). Shyness: conceptualization and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 629-639.

Kashdan, T.B. (2007). Social anxiety spectrum and diminished positive experiences: Theoretical synthesis and meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 27, 348-365.

Leary, M.R. (1983). A brief version of the Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9, 371-375.

Leary, M.R., & Kowalski, R.M. (1995). Social anxiety. New York: Guilford.

Maner, J.K., Miller, S.L., Schmidt, N.B., & Eckel, L.A. (2008). Submitting to defeat: Social anxiety, dominance threat, and decrements in testosterone. Psychological Science, 19, 764-768.

Mansell, W., & Clark, D.M. (1999). How do I appear to others? Social anxiety and processing of the observable self. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 37, 419-434.

Mattick, R. P., & Clarke, J. C. (1998). Development and validation of measures of social phobia scrutiny fear and social interaction anxiety. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 36, 455-470.

Meltzer, J.N., & Conroy, D.E. (2004). Structural validity of the Fear of Success Scale. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 8, 89-108.

Meng, X. L., Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1992). Comparing correlated correlation coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 172-175.

Miller, J.R. (1994). Fear of success: Psychodynamic implications. Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis, 22, 129-136.

Monahan, L., Kuhn, D., & Shaver, P. (1974). Intrapsychic versus cultural explanations of the “fear of success” motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29, 60-64.

Rapee, R.M., & Heimberg, R.G. (1997). A cognitive-behavioral model of anxiety in social phobia. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 35, 741-756.

Rodebaugh, T.L., Woods, C.M., & Heimberg, R.G. (2007). The reverse of social anxiety is not always the opposite: The reverse-scored items of the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale do not belong. Behavior Therapy, 38, 192-206.

Rodebaugh, T.L., Woods, C.M., Thissen, D.M., Heimberg, R.G., Chambless, D.L., & Rapee, R.M. (2004).  More information from fewer questions: The factor structure and item properties of the original and Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale. Psychological Assessment, 16, 169-181.

Schneier, F.R., Heimberg, R.G., Belzer, K., & Liebowitz, M.R. (2006). Submissive behavior and social comparison in social anxiety disorder.  Unpublished manuscript.

Schuster, D.B. (1955). On the fear of success. Psychiatric Quarterly, 29, 412-420.

Steiger, J.H., & Lind, J.C. (1980, May).  Statistically-based tests for the number of common factors. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society, Iowa City, IA.

Swann, W.B. (1983). Self-verification: Bringing social reality into harmony with the self. In J. Suls & A.G. Greenwald (Eds.), Social psychological perspectives on the self (Vol. 2, pp. 33-66). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Swann, W.B. (1990). To be adored or to be known? The interplay of self-enhancement and self-verification. In T. Higgins & R.M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (Vol. 2, pp. 408-448). New York: Guilford.

Tresemer, D. (1976). The cumulative record of research on “fear of success”. Sex Roles, 2, 217-236.

Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1-10.

Valentiner, D.P., Renner, K.A., & Smith, S.A. (2008). Social self-esteem and a preference for negative feedback about one’s social value: Examining the applicability of self verification theory to social anxiety. Manuscript submitted for review.

Wallace, S.T., & Alden, L.E. (1995). Social anxiety and standard setting following social success or failure. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 19, 613-631.

Wallace, S.T., & Alden, L.E. (1997). Social phobia and positive social events: The price of success. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 106, 416-424.

Watson, D., Clark, L.A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.

Weeks, J. W., Heimberg, R. G., Fresco, D. M., Hart, T. A., Turk, C. L., Schneier, F. R., & Liebowitz, M. R. (2005). Empirical validation and psychometric evaluation of the Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale in patients with social anxiety disorder. Psychological Assessment, 17, 179-190.

Weeks, J.W., Heimberg, R.G., & Rodebaugh, T.L. (2008a). The Fear of Positive Evaluation Scale: Assessing a proposed cognitive component of social anxiety disorder. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 22, 44-55.

Weeks, J.W., Heimberg, R.G., Rodebaugh, T.L., & Norton, P.J. (2008b). Exploring the relationship between fear of positive evaluation and social anxiety. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 22, 386-400.

Weeks, J.W., Norton, P.J., & Heimberg, R.G. (in press). Exploring the latent structure of two cognitive components of social anxiety: Taxometric analyses of fears of negative and positive evaluation. Depression and Anxiety.

Zuckerman, M., & Allison, S.N. (1976). An objective measure of fear of success: Construction and validation. Journal of Personality Assessment, 40, 422-430.

Author Notes

Justin W. Weeks, Tejal A. Jakatdar, and Richard G. Heimberg, Adult Anxiety Clinic of Temple, Department of Psychology, Temple University.  Justin W. Weeks is now at the Department of Psychology, Ohio University, Athens, OH.

Portions of this paper were presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Behavioral and Cognitive Therapies, Philadelphia, PA, November, 2007.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Richard G. Heimberg, Department of Psychology, Temple University, Weiss Hall, 1701 North 13th Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19122-6085, or by electronic mail to heimberg@temple.edu.

Footnotes

¹ Because all items included in the BFNE and SIAS were administered in the current study, it was possible to determine whether the use of straightforward items only influenced our results.  All analyses were repeated using the BFNE and SIAS total scores, and findings were substantively identical to the results based on straightforward items only.  Details of these analyses are available upon request.

² Two participants did not report their gender.

³ In addition, to fully examine the possibility that a superior alternative factor solution for the FSQ-S-D might exist, a principal components analysis was conducted using promax rotation, implemented using SPSS 16.0 for Windows. All eighteen FSQ-S-D items were entered. A scree plot indicated that two factors should be extracted. The first factor (PPF) had an eigenvalue of 11.77 and accounted for 65.4% of the variance, with item loadings ranging from 0.79 to 0.90; the second factor (PNF) had an eigenvalue of 1.81 and accounted for 10.04% of the variance, with item loadings ranging from 0.30 to 0.92. Thus, the obtained exploratory factor analytic results corroborated our CFA findings regarding the FSQ-S-D.

⁴ In addition, we attempted to compare the hypothesized confirmatory structural model consisting of four correlated, latent factors (i.e., FPE, FNE, preference for negative feedback, and preference for positive feedback) to an alternative model with these same four latent factors defining a higher order factor. However, upon testing this model in the present sample, the solution did not converge properly.

⁵ The only exception in this case was the non-significant relationship between PPF and social interaction anxiety (SIAS-S scores) upon controlling for positive affect (partial r = -.07, p = .19).

⁶ The full results of these follow-up analyses are available upon request, but they are not included here to preserve space.

Table 1: Means and Standard Deviations for All Study Measures

Measure	M	SD
Fear of Positive Evaluation Scale	24.42	13.00
Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale – Straightforward items	19.95	7.25
Social Phobia Scale	18.83	13.91
Social Interaction Anxiety Scale – Straightforward items	20.84	12.84
Positive and Negative Affect Scale – Positive subscale	34.51	6.63
Positive and Negative Affect Scale – Negative subscale	21.99	7.45
Submissive Behavior Scale	25.58	9.02
Social Comparison Rating Scale	61.53	17.76
Fear of Success Scale	24.28	4.07
Feedback Seeking Questionnaire-Social subscale- Dimensional format-Preference for Positive Feedback	24.82	9.58
Feedback Seeking Questionnaire-Social subscale- Dimensional format-Preference for Negative Feedback	21.64	9.62

Note: Ns vary from 397-420 due to missing data.

Table 2. Correlations Among All Study Measures

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
1.      FPES	--
2.      BFNE-S	.42**	--
3.      SPS	.56**	.53**	--
4.      SIAS-S	.56**	.65**	.74**	--
5.      PANAS-PA	-.21**	-.25**	-.28**	-.41**	--
6.      PANAS-NA	.37**	.53**	.58**	.57**	-.27**	--
7.      SBS	.58**	.56**	.59**	.68**	-.33**	.42**	--
8.      SCRS	-.32**	-.36**	-.44**	-.50**	.46**	-.36**	-.39**	--
9.      FOSS-S	.26**	.20**	.24**	.21**	-.22**	.20**	.14*	-.21**	--
10.  FSQ-S-D-PPF	-.19**	.02	-.19**	-.15*	.22**	-.06	-.10	.16**	-.21**	--
11.  FSQ-S-D-PNF	-.19**	-.13*	-.21**	-.23**	.20**	-.08	-.17**	.16**	-.15*	.75**

Notes: FPES = Fear of Positive Evaluation Scale; BFNE-S = Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale-Straightforward items; SPS = Social Phobia Scale; SIAS-S = Social Interaction Anxiety Scale-Straightforward items; PANAS-PA = Positive and Negative Affect Schedule-Positive Affect; PANAS-NA = Positive and Negative Affect Schedule-Negative Affect; SBS = Submissive Behavior Scale; SCRS = Social Comparison Rating Scale; FOSS-S = Fear of Success Scale-Straightforward items; FSQ-S-D-PPF = Feedback Seeking Questionnaire-Social subscale-Dimensional format-Preference for Positive Feedback; FSQ-S-D-PNF = Feedback Seeking Questionnaire-Social subscale-Dimensional format-Preference for Negative Feedback. Ns vary from 396-419 due to missing data.

*p = .01 **p = .001

Table 3: Regression Weights From Regression Analyses Examining the Prediction of Submissive Behaviors and Social Self-Rankings (Social Comparison Tendencies) by Fears of Positive and Negative Evaluation

Variable	Submissive Behavior Scale			Social Comparison Rating Scale
	Β	SE B	Beta	Β	SE B	Beta
FPE	.30	.03	.42	-.29	.07	-0.21
FNE	.48	.05	.38	-.66	.12	-0.27

Notes: FPE = Fear of Positive Evaluation; FNE = Fear of Negative Evaluation. Adjusted R² = .45 for submissive behaviors and .16 for social self-rankings (Social Comparison Rating Scale). All predictors were significant in both equations, all ps < .001.

Table 4: Latent Correlations Among Fear of Positive Evaluation, Fear of Negative Evaluation, Preference for Negative Social Feedback, and Preference for Positive Social Feedback.

	FPE	FNE	PNF
FNE	.49*	--	--
PNF	-.20*	-.14*	--
PPF	-.24*	-.04	.76*

Notes: FPE = Fear of Positive Evaluation; FNE = Fear of Negative Evaluation; PNF = Preference for Negative Feedback; PPF = Preference for Positive Feedback. *p < .01.

Figure Caption

Figure 1. Completely standardized solution of the 2-factor fear of evaluation model.

* p < .01.