Understanding the Relationship Between Self-Esteem and Social Anxiety
Self-esteem and social anxiety are connected through the way people evaluate themselves in situations where other people may judge, accept, reject, admire, or criticize them. Self-esteem concerns a person's general evaluation of personal worth. Social anxiety concerns apprehension about social or performance situations in which scrutiny and unfavorable evaluation seem possible. The relationship becomes especially consequential when social feedback is treated as a verdict on the value of the self. A conversation, classroom contribution, job interview, date, or public presentation can then become a test of personal adequacy rather than one event among many experiences. The central scientific question is how judgments of self-worth and fears of social evaluation interact over time, through cognition, emotion, attention, behavior, and social opportunity. Rapee and Heimberg (1997)00022-3); Leary et al. (1995).
Research supports an association between lower explicit self-esteem and greater social anxiety, while showing that the association is neither universal nor a complete explanation of the condition. Global self-esteem, confidence in a particular social ability, concern about how others see the self, and specific negative expectations are distinct variables. Some people with social anxiety maintain positive general self-regard while fearing humiliation in particular contexts. Others experience broad self-criticism, shame, or fragile self-worth. Their difficulties may require different formulations, even when they report comparable levels of distress or avoidance. A clinical comparison found lower self-esteem and greater self-criticism among diagnosed participants with social anxiety disorder, but its small sample limits generalization. Iancu et al. (2015); Moscovitch (2009).
For readers asking whether low self-esteem causes social anxiety, the evidence supports a more differentiated answer: lower self-esteem can precede later anxiety symptoms, anxiety can affect self-evaluation, and shared experiences or other vulnerabilities can influence both. Longitudinal findings depend on the age group, instruments, timescale, and whether anxiety is measured generally or as specifically social. A meta-analysis found small prospective paths in both directions for self-esteem and broad anxiety. An adolescent longitudinal study found that explicit self-esteem predicted social-anxiety symptoms two years later, while the reverse prospective path was not supported in that sample. Neither finding authorizes a universal causal rule. Sowislo and Orth (2013); van Tuijl et al. (2014).
Definitions: What Is Being Evaluated?
Global self-esteem, state self-esteem, and social self-esteem
Global self-esteem is the general evaluative attitude a person holds toward themselves, often studied as relatively stable but developmentally changeable. State self-esteem refers to temporary changes in perceived worth following experiences such as success, criticism, inclusion, or exclusion. Social self-esteem concerns perceived personal value specifically within relationships and social situations. A person can endorse an overall sense of worth while believing they seem awkward among strangers. Conversely, someone who feels socially capable may still evaluate themselves harshly in other areas. Treating these levels as interchangeable conceals important variation and can generate misleading findings when global scales are used to explain specific social fears. Leary et al. (1995); Valentiner et al. (2011).
Self-esteem has at least three analytically distinct features: level, stability, and contingency. Level describes the typical positive or negative evaluation. Stability describes the magnitude of change across situations or time. Contingency describes the conditions on which that evaluation depends. A person whose worth feels secure only while receiving approval can show apparently high self-esteem during successful encounters and sharp declines after perceived disapproval. This is relevant to social anxiety because anticipated evaluation may threaten an identity-defining standard, intensifying vigilance even before anyone has responded. The contingencies-of-self-worth model provides a conceptual account of this pattern; individual variability and contextual evidence remain essential. Crocker and Wolfe (2001).
Social anxiety as a dimension and social anxiety disorder as a diagnosis
Social anxiety varies continuously across people and contexts. It may appear as hesitation during a presentation, concern about speaking to an unfamiliar person, or worry over how one's appearance or behavior will be interpreted. Social anxiety disorder refers to a clinically assessed pattern of marked fear or anxiety about scrutiny, often accompanied by avoidance or intense endurance of situations, persistence, and meaningful distress or impairment. Assessment requires developmental, cultural, and functional context; the mere presence of low self-esteem, embarrassment, shyness, or discomfort with public speaking does not establish the disorder. The United States National Institute of Mental Health describes social anxiety disorder in terms of persistent fear of judgment and interference with ordinary activities and relationships. NIMH; NICE (2013).
The diagnostic question is answered through a clinical assessment of anxiety, avoidance, duration, severity, functional interference, and possible alternative or accompanying conditions. In contrast, self-esteem is a psychological construct rather than a psychiatric diagnosis. Low questionnaire scores may indicate negative self-evaluation, yet they cannot independently determine whether a person has an anxiety disorder. This distinction matters especially when online discussions equate social discomfort, insecurity, low confidence, and a clinical syndrome. For the broader diagnostic territory, the separately published article Social Anxiety Disorder: Symptoms, Causes, Diagnosis, and Treatment has the primary diagnostic intent; the present chapter examines the interaction of self-evaluation and social fear.
Self-worth, self-concept, self-efficacy, and social competence
Self-worth refers to the person's felt value and deservingness of regard. Self-concept refers to a broader organization of beliefs about who one is, including roles, traits, abilities, and identities. Self-efficacy is confidence in one's capacity to perform particular actions under specified circumstances. Social competence involves behavioral abilities and the fit between actions and the demands of a situation. Someone may believe they can deliver a well-prepared speech but still feel worthless if the audience criticizes it. Another may value themselves and nonetheless need practice with unfamiliar conversational conventions. These distinctions explain why treatment and research should not reduce every social difficulty to low self-esteem. Crocker and Wolfe (2001); Rapee and Heimberg (1997)00022-3).
How Fear of Evaluation Becomes a Threat to the Self
Fear of negative evaluation
Fear of negative evaluation concerns apprehension that others will judge one's appearance, competence, character, or behavior unfavorably. It can orient attention toward possible mistakes, signs of disapproval, and imagined personal shortcomings. In social anxiety, an ordinary conversational pause may be interpreted as evidence that the speaker is dull, and a neutral expression may become evidence of rejection. These interpretations are psychologically compelling because they make anticipated external judgments seem to confirm pre-existing self-beliefs. Cognitive-behavioral accounts emphasize the interaction among anticipated scrutiny, internal self-representations, perceived standards, attentional selection, and anxiety-related behavior. Rapee and Heimberg (1997)00022-3); Moscovitch (2009).
Fear of negative evaluation can occur when general self-esteem is low, but the fear is also shaped by the importance attached to the particular audience. A highly competent student may fear seeming ignorant to respected peers, while a professional may fear that visible trembling will reveal supposed weakness. An evaluative threat gains force when its meaning extends from a specific performance to the person as a whole. The key transition is from the belief that an action might go badly to the belief that a poor action will demonstrate personal inadequacy. This is a theoretical formulation rather than an experimentally established sequence in every individual. Moscovitch (2009); Crocker and Wolfe (2001).
Fear of positive evaluation
Positive attention may also be threatening. Praise, recognition, compliments, or visible success can raise expectations of continued performance, attract scrutiny, or change perceived status in a group. Fear of positive evaluation describes anxiety about these consequences. A person may minimize an achievement to avoid becoming conspicuous, or resist praise because it creates a feared obligation to keep meeting elevated expectations. The Fear of Positive Evaluation Scale was developed to investigate this proposed dimension, and subsequent research supports its relevance to social anxiety. Its presence should not be assumed from an individual's discomfort with praise alone; meaning and context require examination. Weeks, Heimberg, and Rodebaugh (2008); Weeks et al. (2008).
Positive and negative evaluation fears complicate a simple story in which the anxious person merely expects failure. A person can dread both being dismissed and being noticed. The common issue may be visibility and the consequences of social rank, obligation, or perceived discrepancy between internal and external images. In a nonclinical sample of emerging adults, structural modeling associated both forms of evaluation fear and self-concept indicators with social anxiety, but cross-sectional associations and statistical paths do not determine causation. The clinical significance of positive-evaluation fear varies by individual and is best assessed through the person's actual feared outcomes. Gök and Yalçınkaya-Alkar (2023).
Self-focused attention and the imagined observer
During feared encounters, attention may shift from the other person's words and real-time social information toward one's own heartbeat, blush, voice, posture, thoughts, or mental image. The individual begins monitoring how they appear and may construct an observer's picture of themselves from internal sensations. Because feeling anxious is then mistaken for looking incompetent, the imagined audience can seem more critical than the available evidence supports. Self-focused attention can impair the quality of engagement, reduce access to corrective cues, and leave distorted memories of performance. Cognitive models describe this pattern as a maintenance process rather than a trait that operates identically in every interaction. Rapee and Heimberg (1997)00022-3); NICE (2013).
Negative self-imagery can also influence social behavior. Experimental research found that activating negative self-images could affect subsequent interactions, illustrating how representations of the self may contribute to what happens socially rather than merely record the past. The practical consequence is that a distressing inner image deserves examination as a subjective representation, while actual feedback must be gathered separately. The person may feel that they look foolish without having observed how they appeared to others. Hirsch, Meynen, and Clark (2004).
Shame, humiliation, and self-criticism
Shame involves a painful negative appraisal of the self, often in relation to exposure, standards, or anticipated judgment. Social anxiety frequently contains fear of a shameful social outcome, while shame can arise after an encounter that the person believes went badly. Self-criticism then extends the incident into a narrative about enduring deficiency. This may sustain anxious expectations for the next interaction, especially when the person treats a socially awkward moment as evidence of global unworthiness. A systematic review of 60 empirical articles found extensive evidence linking shame and social anxiety, alongside heterogeneity and methodological limitations. This supports the importance of shame while leaving questions about temporal direction and causal mechanisms open. Swee, Hudson, and Heimberg (2021).
Shame and guilt should also be distinguished in formulation. Guilt typically concerns a particular behavior or perceived violation; shame often concerns the self exposed by an event. Both can occur together. A person might regret interrupting someone and also conclude that they are fundamentally unlikable. The second interpretation is more likely to destabilize self-worth and amplify social monitoring. Some self-critical thoughts are responses to actual hostile or exclusionary environments. Analysis must therefore attend to discrimination, bullying, and relational harm rather than treating every negative appraisal as an isolated cognitive error. Swee et al. (2021); Crocker and Wolfe (2001).
Avoidance and the Maintenance of Social Threat
Overt avoidance and restricted opportunity
Avoidance can mean not attending a gathering, declining to ask questions, turning down opportunities, avoiding eye contact, leaving early, or communicating only when extensive rehearsal is possible. Immediate relief makes withdrawal compelling, yet repeated avoidance limits opportunities to test feared predictions, learn new responses, and experience belonging. Over time, a person may begin to interpret their restricted life as evidence of personal inadequacy, reinforcing both social fear and negative self-evaluation. This is a plausible maintaining cycle described by clinical models and treatment frameworks; it does not mean that every withdrawal is maladaptive, because limits and safety decisions can be reasonable. Rapee and Heimberg (1997)00022-3); NICE (2013).
Avoidance has an opportunity cost beyond the moment of fear. Reduced participation can mean fewer friendships, less practice with professional communication, and diminished access to feedback about actual strengths. A worker who avoids every meeting may receive fewer chances to influence decisions; a student who remains silent may be judged less engaged even when knowledgeable. These consequences are mediated by social context and can coexist with genuine environmental barriers. Clinically useful formulation asks both what an individual fears and what the avoidance has prevented them from learning, accomplishing, or receiving.
Safety behaviors and concealed participation
Some people enter feared situations but use safety behaviors intended to prevent embarrassment. They rehearse every sentence, hide their hands, speak very little, continually check faces for approval, agree with everyone, or mentally review how to avoid attention. These strategies can preserve a sense of control while consuming attention and preventing the person from learning whether a feared outcome would actually occur without the protective maneuver. A randomized experimental study of reducing safety behaviors found lower reported social anxiety and greater self-reported emotional disclosure relative to a control condition, with nuances in observer-rated effects. Evidence supports assessing the function of behavior rather than classifying an action as universally harmful. Stentz and Cougle (2022).
An important difference exists between appropriate preparation and a maintaining safety behavior. Preparing questions for an interview can improve performance; preparing because one believes any spontaneous response will reveal worthlessness may increase dependence on a rigid script. Speaking briefly can reflect personal style, privacy, or cultural etiquette; speaking briefly because one assumes any full answer will lead to ridicule has a different psychological function. Assessment identifies the prediction the behavior is meant to prevent, its immediate effects, and its effect on opportunities for learning. NICE (2013).
Anticipatory worry and post-event rumination
Social anxiety can extend far beyond the duration of an interaction. Before an event, a person may predict mistakes, rehearse possible judgments, and repeatedly imagine unfavorable outcomes. Afterward, they may replay their facial expressions and sentences, infer disapproval from ambiguous cues, and search for evidence of inadequacy. When this process becomes a negative audit of the self, the emotional cost of one interaction can last for hours or days. A 2024 systematic review and meta-analysis of 35 studies found a moderate association between post-event rumination and social anxiety, with variability related to the measures and tasks used. Association does not establish that rumination always causes later anxiety. Edgar et al. (2024).
Rumination also changes which social information becomes memorable. A single awkward pause can be replayed repeatedly while a warm response from another person disappears from the mental summary. The result is a selectively negative record of one's social life. Because memory and interpretation are part of the problem, a clinician may address how evidence is collected after an event, rather than simply encouraging a more flattering self-description. NICE includes anticipatory and post-event processes among the targets of established cognitive-behavioral programs for social anxiety. NICE (2013).
Theories Explaining Self-Esteem and Social Anxiety
Cognitive-behavioral models of social threat
The model by Rapee and Heimberg describes anxious individuals as constructing a mental representation of themselves as seen by an audience and comparing that representation with perceived audience standards. Monitoring potential negative evaluation, physiological responses, and threat cues can sustain anxiety and protective responses. Clark and Wells' clinical tradition similarly emphasizes self-focused attention, safety behaviors, distorted social images, and unhelpful processing before and after events; these mechanisms are represented in the NICE treatment recommendations. Both frameworks treat the person's interpretation and behavior as active elements of maintaining anxiety. Rapee and Heimberg (1997)00022-3); NICE (2013).
These models explain why confidence alone is an incomplete treatment target. Repeating that one is valuable may leave a person still scanning for judgment, avoiding contact, or relying on protective rituals. Cognitive and behavioral processes must be investigated together. In addition, the models are conceptual frameworks supported by a variety of experimental, observational, and treatment studies; not every component has equivalent causal evidence, and the same process can have different functions across contexts. Goldin et al. (2013); Stentz and Cougle (2022).
Sociometer theory and belonging
Sociometer theory proposes that self-esteem functions partly as a monitor of perceived relational value and potential exclusion. Changes in self-regard can track feelings of acceptance and rejection, making social experiences particularly salient when belonging seems endangered. The original research provided experimental and correlational evidence linking inclusion-relevant experiences and state self-esteem. Applied to social anxiety, this framework predicts that anticipated exclusion can become especially threatening when the person relies heavily on signs of acceptance to assess personal worth. It does not claim that all self-esteem is reducible to popularity or that socially anxious individuals uniformly have a hypersensitive sociometer. Leary et al. (1995).
The social world also contains meaningful differences in the value of approval. Disapproval from a stranger, criticism by a trusted partner, or exclusion from a culturally important group may carry distinct implications. Sociometer theory helps explain why identical feedback can have very different emotional consequences. The person's interpretation of the relationship, the perceived stakes, and available alternative sources of belonging are relevant to the resulting self-evaluation. Social connection is an environment for development, rather than simply a count of favorable comments. Leary et al. (1995).
Contingencies of self-worth
The contingencies-of-self-worth approach focuses on domains in which people have invested the stakes of personal worth. Approval, social competence, appearance, achievement, and perceived moral character can each become especially important conditions for feeling valuable. A socially anxious person may fear a gathering because social rejection would be painful, because it would obstruct a practical goal, or because it would seem to destroy the foundation of their worth. These explanations overlap but have different implications for assessment. A formulation should identify the particular conditional rule: for example, being respected only if one never looks nervous, or belonging only if every interaction is successful. Crocker and Wolfe (2001).
Low average self-esteem and strongly contingent self-worth are not synonymous. The former concerns the level of evaluation; the latter concerns the rules determining it. A person with consistently modest self-esteem can tolerate criticism without major fluctuation, while a person with apparently high self-esteem may become intensely anxious when an important contingency is threatened. Research requires separate measures of these dimensions before interpreting their contribution. This framework offers a way to investigate self-worth that complements specific models of social-anxiety symptoms. Crocker and Wolfe (2001).
Self-verification and persistent negative social self-beliefs
Self-verification models suggest that individuals can prefer feedback consistent with an established self-view, even when the feedback is unfavorable. If someone believes they are fundamentally awkward or unlikable, reassurance can feel implausible or may be discounted, while criticism seems authentic. Two studies examining negative social feedback preferences and social self-esteem found preliminary evidence for processes that might help explain residual social anxiety after treatment. Because these findings were modest in scope and specific in design, they support a research hypothesis rather than an established account for every patient. Valentiner et al. (2011).
This account draws attention to the stability of a person's interpersonal self-story. When the self-description is rigid, a successful interaction can be reinterpreted as an exception, politeness from others, or luck. Addressing this process may involve examining the rules by which contradictory evidence is rejected, rather than increasing the amount of positive feedback alone. A clinical plan needs to distinguish realistic skepticism from a self-confirming interpretation pattern. Valentiner et al. (2011).
What the Empirical Evidence Shows
Cross-sectional associations and clinical comparisons
Many questionnaire studies find that people reporting greater social anxiety also report lower explicit self-esteem or more negative self-perceptions. The direction and magnitude vary depending on the sample and measurement strategy. A small clinical comparison by Iancu and colleagues included 32 individuals with diagnosed social anxiety disorder and 30 controls and examined self-esteem, dependency, self-efficacy, and self-criticism. Its results suggest clinically relevant self-evaluative differences, while the sample size and group design cannot establish origins or prospective mechanisms. A separate study of 325 nonclinical emerging adults found that evaluation fears and self-concept variables were associated with social anxiety in a structural model. Structural equation modeling with cross-sectional data remains correlational. Iancu et al. (2015); Gök and Yalçınkaya-Alkar (2023).
Clinical and nonclinical populations can differ in impairment, avoidance, symptom distribution, co-occurring depression, and familiarity with evaluative situations. Findings from university students cannot automatically be applied to people receiving specialist care, and the reverse is equally true. Researchers should specify whether they studied trait self-esteem, state fluctuations, social self-esteem, self-concept, self-criticism, or automatic associations rather than treating every measure as the same construct. This is essential when translating a finding into advice for someone living with social anxiety.
Longitudinal evidence: does self-esteem precede anxiety?
Longitudinal studies provide stronger temporal information than a single cross-sectional comparison. Sowislo and Orth synthesized prospective associations between self-esteem and later depression or anxiety while controlling prior levels of the predicted outcome. For anxiety, the reported mean path from self-esteem to later anxiety was approximately beta −.10, and the reverse path from anxiety to later self-esteem approximately beta −.08. The similar small magnitudes suggest reciprocal associations for broad anxiety measures rather than a strong one-way effect. Because anxiety in this meta-analysis was not restricted to social anxiety disorder, its estimates should not be presented as disorder-specific causal coefficients. Sowislo and Orth (2013).
In adolescents, van Tuijl and colleagues studied implicit and explicit self-esteem alongside symptoms of depression and social anxiety over time. Explicit self-esteem predicted social-anxiety symptoms at a two-year follow-up; implicit self-esteem did not show the same predictive effect, and symptoms did not predict subsequent low self-esteem in the examined model. This adds domain-specific longitudinal evidence for an association while illustrating that timing, age, and measurement type change the interpretation. A longitudinal coefficient still may reflect unmeasured common causes, selection, or contextual experiences rather than a direct biological or psychological cause. van Tuijl et al. (2014).
Automatic and reflective self-evaluation
Explicit self-esteem usually involves answers to deliberate self-report questions. Implicit measures attempt to capture relatively automatic associations, often through response speed, but interpretation depends heavily on task design and psychometric assumptions. Research has not established that implicit and explicit self-esteem function identically in social anxiety. One small study of high- and low-social-anxiety women found differences on explicit self-esteem but a less straightforward pattern on an implicit association task. The adolescent longitudinal study likewise found different prospective results for explicit and implicit measures. These findings caution against treating an online implicit test or a single questionnaire score as a hidden diagnosis of deficient self-worth. de Jong (2002)00022-5); van Tuijl et al. (2014).
What treatment studies can add
Treatment research can examine whether changing self-beliefs accompanies or statistically mediates changes in symptoms. In a study comparing cognitive-behavioral therapy and a waitlist among adults with social anxiety disorder, Goldin and colleagues examined positive and negative self-views and their relationship to symptom improvement. Their findings support self-evaluative beliefs as relevant candidates in the change process. However, even mediation within treatment studies requires careful attention to measurement timing, shared causes, and specificity; it does not imply that a global self-esteem intervention alone will treat the disorder. Goldin et al. (2013).
A systematic review and network meta-analysis including 101 trials and more than 13,000 participants assessed psychological and pharmacological interventions for adult social anxiety disorder. Individual cognitive-behavioral therapy showed substantial benefits relative to comparison conditions and was recommended as a preferred initial intervention. The synthesis evaluated treatments for the disorder, not isolated self-esteem-enhancement programs. It therefore supports anxiety-focused evidence-based treatment, while leaving open the incremental benefit of directly targeting global self-esteem in particular patients. Mayo-Wilson et al. (2014)70329-3).
Development Across the Life Span and Social Context
Childhood and adolescence
Children gradually develop self-descriptions through family interactions, peer feedback, achievement, comparison, and their interpretation of social responses. Social fears may emerge as peer reputation and visibility become more salient. In adolescence, belonging and status often acquire particular emotional importance, while self-evaluation is still developing. Social anxiety disorder frequently begins in childhood or adolescence, and difficulties may affect classroom participation, friendships, and developmental opportunities. These patterns warrant careful attention without pathologizing ordinary self-consciousness or normative changes in confidence. NIMH; NICE (2013).
Peer victimization, exclusion, and invalidating interpersonal experiences can contribute to perceived social threat. A child who has repeatedly been humiliated may form expectancies based on real experience. Effective assessment evaluates whether avoidance is reinforced by current danger, prior learning, developmental differences, or the interaction among them. NICE recommends examining school and home environments, peer victimization, developmental factors, and associated needs when assessing young people. Interventions for children and adolescents must also be adapted to their maturity and social environment. NICE (2013).
Adulthood, work, intimacy, and transitions
Adult social evaluation occurs in workplaces, professional networks, friendships, intimate relationships, public settings, and increasingly digital spaces. Threat can concentrate in situations where an individual's role or identity is salient, such as a promotion, public criticism, migration, or entry into a new social community. Someone whose self-worth depends heavily on appearing competent may experience intense social fear at work while functioning comfortably with old friends. Domain specificity means researchers and clinicians should map situations rather than assume the same level of anxiety across all contexts. The published article Social Anxiety at Work: Meetings, Presentations, Feedback, and Avoidance addresses occupational situations as its own primary topic.
Interpersonal reassurance can become complicated when a person repeatedly seeks proof that they are liked. Reassurance may temporarily lower distress, but its value depends on whether it promotes secure engagement or becomes a ritual that must be repeated after each ambiguous interaction. Couples, families, peers, and supervisors can help by responding to real relational concerns and supporting meaningful participation rather than offering constant global verdicts on the person's worth. This is a contextual application of cognitive and interpersonal models, and the optimum approach depends on relationship dynamics. Leary et al. (1995); NICE (2013).
Culture, identity, and social standards
The expression of respect, modesty, confidence, and appropriate self-disclosure varies across cultures and social groups. An individual who avoids praising themselves may be following a valued norm, and a person who is cautious in an unfamiliar culture may be responding realistically to uncertainty. A clinical understanding of social anxiety should consider distress, flexibility, impairment, and the standards actually present in a social setting. Measures developed in one language or population require appropriate validation elsewhere. Cultural differences can shape which forms of evaluation are feared, what shame signifies, and when visible self-confidence is socially rewarded or penalized. NICE (2013); Swee et al. (2021).
Social power also matters. Racism, disability stigma, bullying, coercive relationships, precarious work, or hostile institutions can make scrutiny and exclusion tangible risks. A complete psychological account evaluates both cognitive processes and the environment in which they developed. Supporting self-worth may involve modifying conditions that repeatedly undermine belonging, providing accommodations, or responding to actual mistreatment. A purely individual focus would omit mechanisms of social evaluation operating outside the person. This is a contextual implication of research on relational value and sociocultural influences, not a claim that every case of social anxiety has the same structural cause. Leary et al. (1995).
Online visibility, comparison, and reputational fear
Digital communication creates additional contexts for perceived evaluation: messaging, video calls, public comments, professional profiles, and metrics of attention. A message left unanswered can become an ambiguous cue; video self-view can intensify appearance monitoring; an enduring post can make a momentary mistake feel permanent. These are plausible extensions of established cognitive mechanisms, but platform-specific causes and magnitudes require direct empirical research. A person may be comfortable speaking in person yet highly anxious about recorded content, or prefer asynchronous communication precisely because it reduces real-time demands. Avoidance and adaptation therefore need to be distinguished through their functions and consequences. Rapee and Heimberg (1997)00022-3).
Online comparison also concerns broader social and appearance-related processes. The separately published Social Comparison on Social Media: Mental Health, Body Image, and Self-Evaluation covers platform-specific comparison as its primary intent. Here the relevant question is how an individual's self-worth becomes dependent on imagined social judgment and how digital interaction can trigger familiar evaluation, monitoring, and avoidance processes. A psychological response to a technological environment should be analyzed without assuming that platform use alone determines a person's mental health.
Assessment and Measurement
A structured clinical and psychological assessment
A useful formulation describes actual feared situations; anticipated negative or positive judgments; the meaning of those judgments for self-worth; bodily symptoms; attention; mental images; avoidance; safety behaviors; rumination; and the impact on learning, work, relationships, or everyday activities. It also asks about developmental history, recent interpersonal adversity, depression, other anxiety problems, neurodevelopmental differences, substance use, and culturally specific concerns. The person's own priorities and goals belong at the center of this assessment. NICE explicitly recommends exploring self-image, attentional focus, feared outcomes, safety-seeking behavior, and anticipatory and post-event processing when assessing social anxiety disorder. NICE (2013).
A clinician may ask for an example from the preceding week: what did the person expect, what did they attend to, what did they do to remain safe, what happened, and what did the experience mean afterward? This sequence can reveal whether global self-worth is threatened by a specific evaluative situation or whether another mechanism is more prominent. For instance, an individual who avoids a social event because of sensory overload may need different support from someone avoiding the same event because they anticipate humiliation. Differential assessment prevents an apparently similar behavior from being assigned a single explanation.
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale and global self-evaluation
The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale is among the most widely used measures of global self-esteem. It is suitable for studying reported overall self-regard and changes in that construct in appropriate research contexts. Its score does not measure social anxiety directly, reveal the full organization of self-worth, or diagnose a mental disorder. Psychometric research has examined whether its positively and negatively worded items reflect a general factor, wording effects, or additional dimensions. Interpretation depends on scoring, language, population, response patterns, and the purpose of assessment. Alessandri et al. (2015).
When a global self-esteem score is combined with a social-anxiety measure, researchers should test whether overlap reflects a substantive relation, shared negative affectivity, item wording, or broader psychological distress. A single low score after a painful event may reflect a state response rather than enduring low self-esteem. Repeated observation and domain-specific information can clarify this distinction. The specific scoring and validation intent belongs to the separate research topic of the Rosenberg scale; the present discussion uses the instrument only to explain evidence about social anxiety. Alessandri et al. (2015).
Social Phobia Inventory and Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale
The Social Phobia Inventory (SPIN) is a self-report instrument designed to assess symptoms relating to fear, avoidance, and physical discomfort in social anxiety. The Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) assesses fear and avoidance across interaction and performance situations, often using clinician ratings. Validation studies support their relevance, and clinical guidelines identify them as instruments that may inform assessment and treatment monitoring. A score is interpreted alongside clinical history and impairment. Neither scale establishes personal worth, and neither substitutes for a diagnostic interview or culturally competent assessment. Connor et al. (2000); Heimberg et al. (1999); NICE (2013).
The scale chosen affects the answer a study can produce. A measure emphasizing performance fear may not represent interpersonal withdrawal equally well; a measure emphasizing negative self-evaluation may partly overlap with a self-esteem questionnaire. Researchers should report the scale version, sample, scoring method, reliability, measurement invariance when relevant, and whether both constructs were assessed at distinct time points. This is particularly important in studies testing whether low self-esteem is a predictor, correlate, mediator, or consequence of social anxiety.
Fear-of-evaluation measures and experimental tasks
Measures of negative and positive evaluation fears can investigate social expectations more narrowly than global social-anxiety scores. The Fear of Positive Evaluation Scale examines concerns about favorable attention and related consequences, a construct that may otherwise be missed. Experimental tasks can manipulate attention, imagery, or behavior to study shorter-term processes; ecological momentary assessment can observe changes close to daily life; and longitudinal designs can examine temporal ordering. Each method answers a different question. Experimental effects within a task do not guarantee long-term clinical change, while longitudinal predictions do not isolate causal mechanisms by themselves. Weeks, Heimberg, and Rodebaugh (2008); Hirsch et al. (2004).
Clinical Associations and Differential Formulation
Depression, generalized anxiety, and negative self-evaluation
Social anxiety and depression can occur together, and negative self-appraisal may be involved in both. Depression can include pervasive low mood, anhedonia, hopelessness, and generalized worthlessness; social anxiety centers on fear of scrutiny and social evaluation, although their effects may overlap. Some people experience low self-esteem largely in social situations, while others report negative worth judgments across life domains. Chronology helps assess whether social withdrawal followed depressed mood or preceded it. NICE recommends exploring the sequence and functional links between depression and social anxiety when planning care. NICE (2013); Sowislo and Orth (2013).
Generalized anxiety involves persistent worry across domains rather than a primary fear of social judgment. Perfectionism, negative self-interpretation, and repetitive thinking can appear in both conditions without making them identical. Avoidant personality features may involve more pervasive interpersonal expectations and personality functioning that require longitudinal clinical interpretation. Neurodevelopmental differences, traumatic social experiences, and communication challenges can affect social participation without being interchangeable with fear-based avoidance. A comprehensive assessment prevents self-esteem from becoming a catch-all explanation for distinct clinical and contextual processes. NICE (2013).
When negative self-beliefs reflect experience
The content of a negative belief must be understood in relation to evidence and lived experience. Some individuals have been excluded, mocked, discriminated against, or criticized repeatedly. A belief that a particular environment is unwelcoming may be accurate. Clinical work may therefore combine reducing overgeneralized predictions with evaluating actual environments, supporting boundaries, and building safer relationships. The meaningful target is flexible interpretation and increased agency, not obligatory positive thinking in the face of real threat. This approach is consistent with guideline-based attention to context, developmental histories, and actual feared situations. NICE (2013).
When professional help is indicated
Professional assessment is appropriate when social fear persistently limits education, work, friendships, relationships, necessary activities, or the ability to seek care; when avoidance expands; or when distress is substantial. People may conceal symptoms because they interpret the need for support as a personal failing. A qualified professional can assess social anxiety, self-esteem, related disorders, and practical barriers together. Screening results and general educational material can help start a discussion, while treatment decisions should consider personal preferences and the severity of impairment. NIMH; NICE (2013).
Evidence-Based Treatment and Practical Implications
Individual CBT for social anxiety disorder
Individual cognitive-behavioral therapy specifically designed for social anxiety disorder has the strongest established psychological treatment support in major guideline and review evidence. Depending on the model, treatment may include understanding maintaining processes, shifting attention outward, reducing safety behaviors, evaluating feared predictions, behavioral experiments, structured exposure, correcting distorted imagery, and modifying pre-event and post-event interpretations. Self-worth is addressed when beliefs about inadequacy or conditional acceptance maintain fear. The treatment target is broader than increasing a score on a self-esteem questionnaire. Mayo-Wilson et al. (2014)70329-3); NICE (2013).
Exposure and behavioral experiments work best when they test meaningful predictions and reduce reliance on protective strategies. For example, someone who believes that a visible pause will lead others to reject them may practice a realistic conversation while attending to the exchange, then record what happened. The aim is to gather evidence, increase tolerance of uncertainty, and expand behavioral flexibility. Success is evaluated by participation, learning, and functioning as well as symptom change; demanding flawless performances would merely restore the same contingency of worth. Treatment should be delivered and adapted by appropriately trained professionals when social anxiety disorder is present. NICE (2013).
Changing self-beliefs and the meaning of criticism
Negative self-beliefs are investigated in relation to their origins, evidence, current consequences, and alternatives that allow a nuanced appraisal. A person may learn to distinguish a difficult moment from an enduring identity, or a specific criticism from a verdict about belonging. Clinical research indicates that changes in self-views can accompany and statistically mediate the effects of CBT on social-anxiety symptoms. The precise role of global self-esteem improvement remains an empirical question because symptom reduction can also arise through changed attention, learning, and behavior. Goldin et al. (2013); Boden et al. (2012).
Changing a self-belief does not require claiming that every audience is kind or every performance will succeed. A more defensible principle is that approval, disapproval, and performance outcomes are informative but incomplete evidence about a person. This shift makes it easier to remain engaged when an interaction is uncertain or imperfect. It also distinguishes self-respect from constant confidence. Therapy can explore multiple valued roles and sources of meaning without imposing a single culturally narrow ideal of self-esteem. Crocker and Wolfe (2001).
Self-compassion, self-criticism, and complementary approaches
Self-compassion involves responding to personal difficulty with care and realistic understanding rather than escalating harsh self-attack. This may be relevant when shame and self-criticism amplify the emotional consequences of perceived social mistakes. A preliminary randomized trial investigated self-guided self-compassion training among people with social anxiety disorder. Such evidence supports continued investigation of a complementary approach, while the intervention's place relative to established disorder-specific CBT remains less certain. Self-compassion should not be advertised as a proven substitute for structured assessment and treatment when impairment is substantial. Sapach and Carleton (2023); Swee et al. (2021).
Compassionate self-response and critical thinking can coexist. Someone can acknowledge discomfort, review an actual error, apologize if necessary, and learn a new skill without interpreting the incident as evidence of total inadequacy. The relevant psychological distinction is between useful appraisal of an action and habitual global condemnation of the self. Strong claims that every increase in self-compassion will produce a specific clinical benefit require condition-specific controlled trials with credible comparisons and longer follow-up. Sapach and Carleton (2023).
Medication and treatment preferences
When social anxiety disorder warrants treatment, options extend beyond work on self-esteem. NICE recommends disorder-specific individual CBT first for adults and identifies selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors such as sertraline or escitalopram as pharmacological options for those who decline cognitive-behavioral interventions and choose medication after discussion of benefits and risks. Treatment selection requires medical evaluation, monitoring, and attention to co-occurring conditions; this article does not offer individual prescribing advice. For children and adolescents, NICE emphasizes developmentally appropriate CBT and does not routinely recommend medication for the disorder. NICE (2013).
The relative merits of treatment modalities should be evaluated using outcomes that matter to the person: reduced fear and avoidance, improved functioning, participation in valued relationships and activities, and tolerability. A treatment designed to improve a generic sense of self-worth may help some people, but its effects cannot be inferred from trials that primarily evaluated social-anxiety-focused CBT. The published Social Anxiety Disorder Treatment: CBT, Exposure, Medication, and Self-Help owns the comprehensive therapeutic decision intent. Mayo-Wilson et al. (2014)70329-3).
Practical strategies consistent with established mechanisms
For everyday difficulties below the threshold of a clinical disorder, useful experiments can begin with identifying a concrete evaluative prediction and recording what actually happens. A person might notice the claim that asking one question will make them look incompetent, test that claim in a manageable setting, and compare their original expectation with the observed response. They can also identify a habitual protective behavior, assess whether it is useful, and practice participating without it when safe. These are educational applications of established CBT principles, not a standardized personal treatment plan, and situations involving actual abuse or threat demand appropriate protective responses. NICE (2013).
A further practice concerns post-event interpretation. Instead of producing a definitive story from one uncertain facial expression, a person can separate observation from inference and include the entire range of available evidence. Shifting attention from constant self-monitoring toward the subject of a conversation may help engagement. Participating imperfectly in an activity with personal meaning can expand experience without requiring an advance guarantee of social success. The psychologically important outcome is the capacity to act while evaluation remains possible. Edgar et al. (2024); Rapee and Heimberg (1997)00022-3).
Research Limitations and Open Questions
Correlation, reverse causation, and common causes
The association between self-esteem and social anxiety is well documented, but explaining that association requires designs capable of distinguishing temporal prediction, within-person change, and intervention effects. Broad anxiety estimates cannot automatically be transferred to social anxiety disorder. Depressive symptoms, personality dimensions, interpersonal history, social adversity, and response styles may account for part of an observed relation. Statistical mediation in cross-sectional studies may reproduce model assumptions rather than demonstrate a mechanism. Larger prospective studies with repeated, fine-grained measurements and appropriate causal assumptions are needed. Sowislo and Orth (2013); van Tuijl et al. (2014).
Measurement overlap and population diversity
Studies frequently rely on self-report, which creates shared-method variance and makes negative mood a potential influence on responses to several scales at once. Researchers should distinguish global worth from social self-esteem and from negative self-perception under scrutiny. They should also test measurement invariance across ages, languages, and sociocultural groups before comparing scores. Many published experiments use students or modest clinical samples, limiting generalizability. Findings about one social setting or one subtype of evaluative fear may not apply to every developmental stage or cultural context. Alessandri et al. (2015); Iancu et al. (2015).
Mechanisms, treatment changes, and unanswered questions
Further research should test whether the most informative predictor is global self-esteem level, instability, contingent worth, social self-esteem, shame, feared negative evaluation, fear of positive evaluation, or a combination that changes by context. Trials could compare standard disorder-specific treatment with carefully defined additional self-worth components and examine functioning over longer follow-up periods. It is also necessary to distinguish improvement in how a person reports self-esteem from durable changes in social participation and reduced anxiety. Studies of negative-feedback preferences, shame, and self-compassion provide useful starting points, with evidence strength varying across mechanisms. Valentiner et al. (2011); Swee et al. (2021); Sapach and Carleton (2023).
Frequently Asked Questions
Can you have high self-esteem and social anxiety?
Yes. Global self-esteem and anxiety about particular social evaluations are related but distinct. Someone may respect themselves and value their abilities while fearing visible anxiety, exclusion, or social scrutiny in certain settings. The reverse also occurs: low global self-esteem can appear without clinically significant social fear. Research is most informative when it measures both general and social-domain evaluations rather than inferring one from the other. Moscovitch (2009); Iancu et al. (2015).
Does low self-esteem cause social anxiety disorder?
Low self-esteem is a possible vulnerability and correlate, but it is not a sufficient or established single cause of the disorder. Longitudinal studies suggest small prospective associations with anxiety generally, and some adolescent findings concern specifically social-anxiety symptoms. Developmental environments, learning, cognitive processing, avoidance, and individual differences also matter. Clinical diagnosis cannot be inferred from low self-esteem alone. Sowislo and Orth (2013); van Tuijl et al. (2014).
Why do compliments sometimes produce anxiety?
Positive attention can increase visibility or create expectations of future performance. Research on fear of positive evaluation shows that favorable judgments may themselves be threatening for some socially anxious individuals. The relevant question is what the compliment is believed to imply: higher standards, unwanted scrutiny, possible envy, or incongruence with one's self-image. Discomfort with a compliment by itself is not a diagnostic sign. Weeks, Heimberg, and Rodebaugh (2008).
Is avoiding social situations a sign of low self-worth?
Avoidance has multiple possible functions. It may be driven by fear of rejection, sensory demands, practical barriers, exhaustion, safety needs, or personal preference. When a person avoids situations specifically to prevent feared negative evaluations, avoidance can maintain social anxiety by limiting opportunities for corrective experience. Its meaning is established through the person's actual expectations, context, and consequences. NICE (2013).
Will raising self-esteem cure social anxiety?
A higher self-esteem score does not guarantee relief from social anxiety disorder. The condition often involves self-focused attention, safety behaviors, avoidance, anxious predictions, and post-event rumination, which may persist even when global self-evaluation improves. Evidence-based disorder-specific CBT addresses these processes and may also change self-beliefs. Treatment should be selected according to clinical need and demonstrated evidence. Mayo-Wilson et al. (2014)70329-3); Goldin et al. (2013).
What is the difference between social anxiety and ordinary self-consciousness?
Both involve awareness of potential social evaluation. The distinction becomes clinically important when fear is persistent and intense, avoidance or distress interferes with functioning, and assessment indicates social anxiety disorder. Occasional nervousness, concern about criticism, or preferring small groups can be consistent with normal variation. A validated questionnaire may inform discussion but does not substitute for clinical evaluation. NIMH; NICE (2013).
How can someone support a friend who is socially anxious?
Support involves listening without reducing the person to their anxiety, responding to actual needs, and respecting autonomy while encouraging meaningful participation. Constantly assuring a friend that everyone likes them may offer short relief but does not necessarily resolve the fear of evaluation. If anxiety is impairing, support with seeking professional care can be valuable. Understanding interpersonal history and context is important when fear reflects real rejection or mistreatment. NIMH; NICE (2013).
Conclusion
Self-esteem and social anxiety meet at a psychologically consequential point: how the person interprets being seen and evaluated by others. Their interaction can involve global self-evaluation, domain-specific social worth, conditional acceptance, feared negative or positive judgments, attention to a critical internal observer, shame, safety behavior, avoidance, and post-event rumination. Empirical research supports the association and provides evidence for particular mechanisms, while longitudinal findings indicate small, context-dependent prospective effects rather than a universal causal sequence. Evidence-based treatment emphasizes reducing anxiety-maintaining processes and strengthening flexible participation; work with self-beliefs is relevant when those beliefs help maintain the difficulty. A mature understanding of self-worth allows social encounters to be informative experiences rather than final judgments about the value of a person. Rapee and Heimberg (1997)00022-3); Sowislo and Orth (2013); NICE (2013).
Related Articles
Cluster Self-Concept, Identity and Self-Esteem — The parent scientific chapter on self-concept, personal identity, self-esteem, and their research connections.
Self-Esteem vs. Self-Confidence: Meaning and Differences — Distinguishes global self-evaluation from confidence in ability and performance.
Social Anxiety Disorder: Symptoms, Causes, Diagnosis, and Treatment — The diagnostic and clinical overview of social anxiety disorder.
Social Anxiety in Conversations: Self-Focus, Silence, and Fear of Judgment — Explains conversation-specific patterns of self-monitoring and inhibition.
Social Anxiety Disorder Treatment: CBT, Exposure, Medication, and Self-Help — Reviews the main treatment decisions and interventions.
Self-Efficacy: How Belief in Your Ability Shapes Action — Explores confidence in capability as a distinct psychological construct.
Self-Esteem and Depression: Longitudinal Evidence and Clinical Implications — Review vulnerability and scar models, longitudinal findings, and what they mean for clinical care.
Self-Esteem After Rejection: Psychological Responses and Recovery — Explore social rejection, threatened belonging, self-evaluation, and evidence-informed recovery.
Low Self-Esteem: Signs, Causes, and Psychological Effects — Describe low self-esteem, common patterns, developmental influences, and evidence-based support.
Self-Acceptance: Meaning, Processes, and Mental Health — Examine acceptance of personal attributes, self-regard, psychological flexibility, and clinical boundaries.
References
Alessandri, G., Vecchione, M., Eisenberg, N., and Łaguna, M. (2015). On the factor structure of the Rosenberg (1965) General Self-Esteem Scale. Psychological Assessment, 27(2), 621–635. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000073.
Boden, M. T., John, O. P., Goldin, P. R., Werner, K., Heimberg, R. G., and Gross, J. J. (2012). The role of maladaptive beliefs in cognitive-behavioral therapy: Evidence from social anxiety disorder. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 50(5), 287–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2012.02.007.
Connor, K. M., Davidson, J. R. T., Churchill, L. E., Sherwood, A., Foa, E., and Weisler, R. H. (2000). Psychometric properties of the Social Phobia Inventory (SPIN): New self-rating scale. British Journal of Psychiatry, 176, 379–386. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.176.4.379.
Crocker, J., and Wolfe, C. T. (2001). Contingencies of self-worth. Psychological Review, 108(3), 593–623. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.593.
de Jong, P. J. (2002). Implicit self-esteem and social anxiety: Differential self-favouring effects in high and low anxious individuals. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 40(5), 501–508. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(01)00022-500022-5).
Edgar, E. V., Richards, A., Castagna, P. J., Bloch, M. H., and Crowley, M. J. (2024). Post-event rumination and social anxiety: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 173, 87–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2024.03.013.
Gök, B. G., and Yalçınkaya-Alkar, Ö. (2023). Clarifying the association of social anxiety with cognitive variables: The role of self-esteem, self-perception, fears of positive and negative evaluation, and post-event processing. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 64(3), 278–287. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12886.
Goldin, P. R., Jazaieri, H., Ziv, M., Kraemer, H., Heimberg, R. G., and Gross, J. J. (2013). Changes in positive self-views mediate the effect of cognitive-behavioral therapy for social anxiety disorder. Clinical Psychological Science, 1(3), 301–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702613476867.
Heimberg, R. G., Horner, K. J., Juster, H. R., Safren, S. A., Brown, E. J., Schneier, F. R., and Liebowitz, M. R. (1999). Psychometric properties of the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale. Psychological Medicine, 29(1), 199–212. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291798007879.
Hirsch, C. R., Meynen, T., and Clark, D. M. (2004). Negative self-imagery in social anxiety contaminates social interactions. Memory, 12(4), 496–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210444000106.
Iancu, I., Bodner, E., and Ben-Zion, I. Z. (2015). Self esteem, dependency, self-efficacy and self-criticism in social anxiety disorder. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 58, 165–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2014.11.018.
Leary, M. R., Tambor, E. S., Terdal, S. K., and Downs, D. L. (1995). Self-esteem as an interpersonal monitor: The sociometer hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(3), 518–530. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.68.3.518.
Mayo-Wilson, E., Dias, S., Mavranezouli, I., Kew, K., Clark, D. M., Ades, A. E., and Pilling, S. (2014). Psychological and pharmacological interventions for social anxiety disorder in adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. The Lancet Psychiatry, 1(5), 368–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(14)70329-370329-3).
Moscovitch, D. A. (2009). What is the core fear in social phobia? A new model to facilitate individualized case conceptualization and treatment. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 16(2), 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpra.2008.04.002.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). (2013). Social anxiety disorder: Recognition, assessment and treatment (CG159). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg159/chapter/recommendations.
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). (n.d.). Social anxiety disorder: What you need to know. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/social-anxiety-disorder-more-than-just-shyness.
Rapee, R. M., and Heimberg, R. G. (1997). A cognitive-behavioral model of anxiety in social phobia. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 35(8), 741–756. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(97)00022-300022-3).
Sapach, M. J. N. T., and Carleton, R. N. (2023). Self-compassion training for individuals with social anxiety disorder: A preliminary randomized controlled trial. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 52(1), 18–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/16506073.2022.2130820.
Sowislo, J. F., and Orth, U. (2013). Does low self-esteem predict depression and anxiety? A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 139(1), 213–240. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028931.
Stentz, L. A., and Cougle, J. R. (2022). Effects of safety behavior fading on social anxiety and emotional disclosure. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 157, 104165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2022.104165.
Swee, M. B., Hudson, C. C., and Heimberg, R. G. (2021). Examining the relationship between shame and social anxiety disorder: A systematic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 90, 102088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2021.102088.
Valentiner, D. P., Skowronski, J. J., McGrath, P. B., Smith, S. A., and Renner, K. A. (2011). Self-verification and social anxiety: Preference for negative social feedback and low social self-esteem. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 39(5), 601–617. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1352465811000300.
van Tuijl, L. A., de Jong, P. J., Sportel, B. E., de Hullu, E., and Nauta, M. H. (2014). Implicit and explicit self-esteem and their reciprocal relationship with symptoms of depression and social anxiety: A longitudinal study in adolescents. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 45(1), 113–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2013.09.007.
Weeks, J. W., Heimberg, R. G., and Rodebaugh, T. L. (2008). The Fear of Positive Evaluation Scale: Assessing a proposed cognitive component of social anxiety. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 22(1), 44–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2007.08.002.
Weeks, J. W., Heimberg, R. G., Rodebaugh, T. L., and Norton, P. J. (2008). Exploring the relationship between fear of positive evaluation and social anxiety. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 22(3), 386–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2007.04.009.