TY - JOUR
T1 - Reliability and validity of four cognitive interpretation bias measures in the context of social anxiety
AU - Duken, Sascha B.
AU - Moriya, Jun
AU - Hirsch, Colette
AU - Woud, Marcella L.
AU - van Bockstaele, Bram
AU - Salemink, Elske
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2025.
PY - 2025/1/7
Y1 - 2025/1/7
N2 - People with social anxiety disorder tend to interpret ambiguous social information in a negative rather than positive manner. Such interpretation biases may cause and maintain anxiety symptoms. However, there is considerable variability in the observed effects across studies, with some not finding a relationship between interpretation biases and social anxiety. Poor psychometric properties of interpretation bias measures may explain such inconsistent findings. We evaluated the internal consistency, test–retest reliability, convergent validity, and concurrent validity of four interpretation bias measures, ranging from more implicit and automatic to more explicit and reflective: the probe scenario task, the recognition task, the scrambled sentences task, and the interpretation and judgmental bias questionnaire. Young adults (N = 94) completed interpretation bias measures in two sessions separated by one week. Psychometric properties were poor for the probe scenario and not acceptable for the recognition task. The reliability of the scrambled sentences task and the interpretation and judgmental bias questionnaire was good, and they correlated highly with social anxiety and each other, supporting their concurrent and convergent validity. However, there are methodological challenges that should be considered when measuring interpretation biases, even if psychometric indices suggest high measurement validity. We also discuss likely reasons for poor psychometric properties of some tasks and suggest potential solutions to improve the assessment of implicit and automatic biases in social anxiety in future research.
AB - People with social anxiety disorder tend to interpret ambiguous social information in a negative rather than positive manner. Such interpretation biases may cause and maintain anxiety symptoms. However, there is considerable variability in the observed effects across studies, with some not finding a relationship between interpretation biases and social anxiety. Poor psychometric properties of interpretation bias measures may explain such inconsistent findings. We evaluated the internal consistency, test–retest reliability, convergent validity, and concurrent validity of four interpretation bias measures, ranging from more implicit and automatic to more explicit and reflective: the probe scenario task, the recognition task, the scrambled sentences task, and the interpretation and judgmental bias questionnaire. Young adults (N = 94) completed interpretation bias measures in two sessions separated by one week. Psychometric properties were poor for the probe scenario and not acceptable for the recognition task. The reliability of the scrambled sentences task and the interpretation and judgmental bias questionnaire was good, and they correlated highly with social anxiety and each other, supporting their concurrent and convergent validity. However, there are methodological challenges that should be considered when measuring interpretation biases, even if psychometric indices suggest high measurement validity. We also discuss likely reasons for poor psychometric properties of some tasks and suggest potential solutions to improve the assessment of implicit and automatic biases in social anxiety in future research.
KW - Cognitive bias
KW - Interpretive bias
KW - Measurement
KW - Psychometrics
KW - Social anxiety
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85214575251&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3758/s13428-024-02576-0
DO - 10.3758/s13428-024-02576-0
M3 - Article
C2 - 39776387
AN - SCOPUS:85214575251
SN - 1554-351X
VL - 57
JO - Behavior Research Methods
JF - Behavior Research Methods
IS - 1
M1 - 48
ER -