Shyness and self-consciousness Chapter 9 of STRANGERS IN A STRANGE LAB

Shyness and self-consciousness Shyness, also called social anxiety, is a form of anxiety that occurs primarily in social situations. It is typically accompanied by beliefs that aspects of one’s performance and self-presentation in social situations are—or will be—inadequate, unworthy, and unacceptable. When this type of anxiety is so extreme that it motivates people to avoid social situations, the term social phobia is used to describe it. Self-consciousness, according to psychologists Allan Fenigstein, Michael Scheier, and Arnold Buss, is a heightened consciousness of oneself that can take either, or both, of two forms: private self-consciousness and public self-consciousness. Private self-consciousness: being introspective Public self-consciousness: being concerned about how one is perceived and evaluated by other people

Implications of this view of social anxiety First, compared to their non-shy counterparts, shy people should experience more negative, self-focused thoughts and feelings before the interaction even begins. They should also have more negative expectations about how good the impending interaction will be (see the upper right-hand portion of Figure 9.1). Second, shy people should continue to experience more negative, self-focused thoughts and feelings during the interaction, while also displaying certain self-protective “safety behaviors” during this time (see the lower portion of Figure 9.1). Specifically, shy people should attempt to minimize their eye contact with their new interaction partners, to speak as little as possible (in order to avoid saying something awkward or dumb), and to adopt a more “closed,” self-protective body posture. Third, shy people should also evaluate themselves and their interaction experience more negatively after the interaction has occurred (see the upper left-hand portion of Figure 9.1).

Effects of shyness (social anxiety) before the interaction In a study conducted by psychologists John Cacioppo, Carol Glass, and Thomas Merluzzi, men who scored either high or low in social anxiety were told that they were going to interact with a female stranger to discuss undergraduate life on college campuses. Immediately before the expected interaction, the men were asked to list all of the thoughts and feelings they experienced while waiting for the interaction to begin. When the researchers analyzed the content of these thoughts and feelings, they found that the socially anxious men reported more negative, self-focused thoughts such as “Will I choke when trying to discuss?” In addition, the more socially anxious men rated the impending interaction significantly more negatively than the non-anxious men did.

Effects of shyness during the interaction Pilkonis (1977) found that the shy participants in his study took longer to speak and spoke less often than the non-shy participants did. The shy participants were also less likely to start new conversation sequences after periods of silence, and they tended to sit farther away from the confederate than the non-shy participants did. Finally, shy men (but not shy women) looked at the confederate less and made less eye contact during the interaction. Natale et al. (1979) found that the most socially anxious dyad members were the least likely to interrupt their partners during their initial interactions. Not interrupting a new acquaintance can be viewed as a “safety behavior”; it helps to minimize the chances of offending the partner by appearing to be rude. Cheek and Buss (1981) reported that the shy women in their study talked less but “fidgeted” (by touching themselves) more than the non-shy women did. The shy women were also rated by observers as being noticeably more tense, inhibited, and unfriendly than their non-shy counterparts.

Effects of shyness during the interaction: safety behaviors What would count as “safety behaviors” for socially anxious people when they carry on a conversation with a stranger? According to Leary et al. (1987), their safest strategy should be to ask their partner questions, provide verbal acknowledgements and confirmations, but refrain from making assertions about facts that their partner might challenge, argue with, or even refute. In a study of same-sex (male-male and female-female) dyads, the researchers found that the more socially anxious dyad members displayed these conversational safety behaviors to a greater degree than the less socially anxious dyad members did. In contrast to Cheek and Buss, who studied only female-female dyads, psychologist Jens Asendorpf (1989) conducted a study that focused exclusively on male-male dyads. He found that the participants with the highest shyness scores adopted more “closed” and defensive body postures than the remaining participants did.

Correlations of the outcome measure with: Correlations of the men’s and women’s shyness scores with various dyad-level outcome measures (Garcia, Stinson, Ickes, Bissonnette, & Briggs ,1991).   Dyad-level outcome measures Correlations of the outcome measure with: Men’s shyness Women’s shyness Verbal behaviors Number of speaking turns (talking) Duration of speaking turns (talking) Number of questions asked Number of conversation sequences initiated -.42 -.45 -.38 -.39 -.30 -.27 -.14 Nonverbal behaviors Number of smiles/laughter Duration of smiles/laughter Number of gazes Duration of gazes Number of mutual gazes Duration of mutual gazes -.34 -.36 -.41 -.44 -.26 -.22 -.31 -.25

Correlation of men’s shyness with Correlations of the men’s shyness scores with various aspects of the men’s and women’s thoughts, feelings, and nonverbal behavior (Garcia, Stinson, Ickes, Bissonnette, & Briggs,1991).   Outcome measure Correlation of men’s shyness with Men’s thoughts, Women’s thoughts, feelings, and behavior feelings, and behavior Thought-feeling content % feelings % self-focused thoughts and feelings % negative thoughts and feelings % negative self thoughts and feelings % negative self feelings % partner-focused thoughts and feelings Nonverbal behaviors Number of mutual gazes initiated Number of mutual gazes terminated Number of expressive gestures Duration of expressive gestures Degree of body orientation Openness (vs. closedness) of body posture  .47 .20 .49 .50 .51 -.37 -.01 -.12 -.40 -.06 -.04 -.36 .23 .37 .26 .34 .29 -.33 -.63 -.54 -.49 -.38 -.35 .04

Other evidence that shyness is “contagious” Heerey and Kring (2007) found that, in same-sex dyads that paired a high social anxiety person with a low social anxiety person, both partners fidgeted more than in dyads where both partners scored low in social anxiety. Even more interesting, however, was their finding that, in the first of these dyad types, the more socially anxious dyad member “initiated bouts of joint fidgeting more frequently than their [less socially anxious] partners . . . Thus, fidgeting appeared to be transmitted across interaction partners and was more frequently initiated by [the more socially anxious] participants.”

Effects of shyness after the interaction   Study Post-interaction measure(s) Effect Cheek and Buss (1981) Self-rating as having acted awkward, inhibited, and quiet Shy > non-shy Asendorpf (1989) Self-rating of shyness and fear of being evaluated Melchior and Cheek (1990) Self-reported anxious thoughts Garcia et al. (1991) Perception of lower interaction quality Shy men > non-shy men Bruch et al. (1995) Self-rating of shyness and concern about the partner’s evaluation Heerey and Kring (2007) Negative post-interaction affect

On the sources of shyness Arnold Buss’s two “ingredients” of shyness: having a high level of public self-consciousness combined with low self-esteem Evidence of a genetic predisposition toward shyness: ectomorphic blue-eyed males with allergies are particularly likely to be shy