Anticipatory Processing and Post-Event Processing in Social Anxiety Disorder: An Update on the Literature

2016 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Quincy JJ Wong
Keyword(s):  
Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Social Anxiety ◽  
Social Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Event Processing ◽  
Anticipatory Processing

Can I Really Do This? An Examination of Anticipatory Event Processing in Social Anxiety Disorder

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 94-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judith M. Laposa ◽  
Neil A. Rector
Keyword(s):  
Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Social Anxiety ◽  
Social Anxiety Disorder ◽  
State Anxiety ◽  
Behavioral Therapy ◽  
Social Situation ◽  
Anxiety State ◽  
Event Processing ◽  
Social Events ◽  
Anticipatory Processing

Clark and Wells (1995) posit that anticipatory processing before a social situation serves to maintain social anxiety. More specifically, ruminative processes similar to post-event processing (PEP) may occur in anticipation of anxiety provoking social events, and in this article, we have labelled this type of anticipatory rumination anticipatory event processing (AnEP). Participants (n = 75) with social anxiety disorder (SAD) completed measures of anticipatory event processing, trait anxious rumination, social anxiety, state anxiety, and PEP, in the context of completing videotaped exposures twice as part of manual-based group cognitive behavioral therapy. AnEP was significantly positively associated with trait anxious rumination and social anxiety and was associated with state anxiety during the first videotaping. AnEP at the two time points was significantly correlated and decreased across the two taped exposures. Greater AnEP at the first taping was associated with greater PEP the following week. PEP after the first videotaped exposure then significantly related to AnEP for the second videotaped exposure several weeks later. Discussion focuses on the similarities between PEP and AnEP as well as implications for cognitive models and treatment of SAD.

scholarly journals Rumination in Children with Social Anxiety Disorder: Effects of Cognitive Distraction and Relation to Social Stress Processing

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonie Rabea Lidle ◽  
Julian Schmitz
Keyword(s):  
Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Social Anxiety ◽  
Social Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Social Stress ◽  
Autonomic Arousal ◽  
Event Processing ◽  
Social Situations ◽  
Cognitive Distraction ◽  
Stress Task ◽  
Anticipatory Processing

AbstractAccording to cognitive models of social anxiety disorder (SAD), both anticipatory processing and post-event processing are core mechanisms in disorder maintenance leading to dysfunctional coping with social situations through negative self-evaluation and increased anxiety. To date, little is known about these processes during late childhood, a critical period for disorder development. Further, it remains unclear if dysfunctional rumination in children can be altered through psychotherapeutic interventions such as cognitive distraction. In the current study, children aged 9 to 13 years with SAD and age- and gender-matched healthy controls (HCs, each: n = 30) participated in an experimental laboratory social stress task while anticipatory processing, post-event processing, subjective anxiety, self-evaluations, and autonomic arousal (skin conductance level) were assessed. Further, the impact of a brief cognitive distraction intervention on post-event processing was assessed. Children with SAD reported more negative anticipatory and post-event processing compared to HC children. Further, negative anticipatory processing was associated with higher subjective anxiety and reduced subjective performance ratings during the social stress task. In the aftermath of the stressor, distraction led to reduced subjective anxiety in the group with SAD and lower autonomic arousal in all children but did not alter post-event processing. The current study suggests that both anticipatory and post-event processing already play a key role in the maintenance of SAD in childhood. While distraction may be beneficial in reducing prolonged subjective anxiety and autonomic arousal after social situations, more research on interventions targeting ruminative processes is needed.

It hurts but I still need it: a qualitative investigation of post-event processing in social anxiety disorder

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 364-369
Author(s):  
Naoki Yoshinaga ◽  
Kota Takaoka ◽  
Osamu Kobori
Keyword(s):  
Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Social Anxiety ◽  
Social Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Social Performance ◽  
Event Processing ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Intermittent Reinforcement ◽  
Metacognitive Beliefs ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Do So

AbstractBackground:It has been proposed that both positive and negative metacognitive beliefs sustain engagement in post-event processing (PEP). However, it is unknown: (1) whether individuals with social anxiety disorder (SAD) actually derive the benefits from PEP that they expect; (2) if this is not the case, how their positive beliefs are maintained; and (3) if they are aware of the counterproductive effects of PEP, why they still perform PEP.Aims:To explore the phenomenology of the processes involved in PEP from the perspective of SADs, in order to address the research questions above.Method:Twenty-one participants suffering from SAD received individual semi-structured interviews. Transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis.Results:Analysis revealed three main themes: (1) ‘Only, safe and useful way to improve myself’: SADs feel the need to improve their social performance, and they believe that PEP is the only, safe, and private way to do so, which is an underlying motive for them to do PEP; (2) ‘It hurts more than helps me’: however, through PEP, they do not seem to obtain the benefit that they expect, or only find a variety of counterproductive outcomes; (3) ‘Better safe than sorry’: they sometimes find makeshift solutions to improve their social performance during PEP, which may maintain their PEP as a form of intermittent reinforcement. They weigh up such costs and benefits, and choose to perform PEP while feeling conflicted about PEP.Conclusions:The results suggest that: (1) SADs rarely obtain the benefits from PEP that they expect; (2) their positive metacognitive beliefs are maintained by solutions they sometimes find during PEP; and (3) SADs choose to perform PEP while feeling conflicted; while PEP ironically maintains and exacerbates negative self-beliefs/images, it is the only safe and useful way to improve their social performance. These findings support and expand on the theories of PEP.

scholarly journals Repetitive Negative Thinking in Social Anxiety Disorder 2: Post-Event Processing

2016 ◽  
Vol a4 (3) ◽  
pp. 263-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel A. Sluis ◽  
Mark J. Boschen ◽  
David L. Neumann ◽  
Karen Murphy
Keyword(s):  
Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Social Anxiety ◽  
Social Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Response To Treatment ◽  
Empirical Literature ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Event Processing ◽  
Repetitive Negative Thinking ◽  
Negative Thinking

Cognitive models of social anxiety disorder (SAD) emphasize post-event processing as a prominent maintaining factor that occurs after social-evaluative events. Post-event processing involves repetitive negative thinking revolved around perceived social failure. The present review concentrates on the relevant and available empirical literature on post-event processing in social anxiety which centres on Clarke and Wells (1995) theoretical framework. Correlational and experimental studies have investigated the relationship between post-event processing and the behavioural, physiological, cognitive and affective outcomes for socially anxious individuals. The majority of study designs include those investigating post-event processing in response to social-evaluative threat, and in response to treatment. Limitations of the existing literature are discussed and suggestions for future research examining the underlying cognitive functions of post-event processing are proposed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document