In this post I just want to let people know about a series of studies at Stanford University. These researchers are studying people's thinking patterns when they are socially anxious or depressed.
Ian Gotlib is a researcher in the psychology department at Stanford who has been studying these patterns for a long time and is a strong and frequent contributor to the scientific investigation of depression and social anxiety. It is a worthwhile experience for participants and a way to contribute to the science if you are interested. His description of the studies is below and a flyer follows his description.
In our studies of depression and of social anxiety, we are
investigating why people diagnosed with clinically significant
depression or anxiety exhibit difficulties or biases in their
processing of emotional information, particularly when they are in
the midst of a significant depressive or anxious episode. We are
trying to understand exactly how these ways of thinking might
precipitate and maintain or prolong depression and anxiety.
Participants come to Stanford to participate in a two-hour session
which involves an interview and completing some questionnaires. We
then usually invite participants back for additional sessions in
which they complete computer activities and possibly have their
breathing rate, heart beat, skin response, and muscle movement
monitored. Many participants will also have the opportunity to have
an fMRI brain scan and receive a picture of their brain. We pay
each participant $25 per hour.
And this is what is on our flyers:
"Do you avoid social situations for fear of embarrassment? Has your
fear of social situations interfered with your life? If so, you may
be eligible to participate in a research study examining how
different people think, or process information. To be eligible for
this study, you must: be a woman with a consistent, strong fear of
social situations that causes you anxiety and interferes with your
life, be in good physical health, be between 18 and 59 years old, be
a US citizen or non-citizen with a Green Card, read and speak
English fluently, have no immediate plans to leave the Bay Area, and
have not participated in this study before. Eligible participants
will receive $25/hour for their time."
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Shy small business owners?
It occurs to me that there may be people who know successful shy business owners, who might be willing to describe them or brag about them a little. I think it is a great way to swap strategies as well. Thanks in advance for your input!
Shy small business owners?
Would any of you shy small business owners be willing to write about your experiences in running a small business? Does shyness get in the way of pursuing your goals? If so, how do you work with it? How has your shyness been a plus? What do you think are the strengths of shyness in running a small business? I'd really appreciate hearing your thoughts, if you'd be willing to share them.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Social Anxiety Stress Reduction Programs Free: Stress Reduction for Social Anxiety at Stanford University
In this blog I just want you to know about a study at Stanford University. A description of the study is below. If you participate in the study you can receive eight sessions of a Mindfulness Meditation class or one that is based on Wellness and Fitness. I know the people there and it is likely to be a good experience in either program. The following is their description of the study:
As part of a study at Stanford University, we are offering 8 sessions of a stress reduction program (either Mindfulness Meditation Based or Wellness and Fitness Based) to people with social anxiety, FREE of charge. The studys goal is to better understand the mechanisms of how these stress reduction programs can improve the lives and wellbeing of individuals who suffer from social anxiety.
We are seeking individuals who primarily have problems with social anxiety and are easily able to travel to Stanford University for assessments before and after the program. Participants must be fluent in English, right handed, age 21-55. We also ask that study participants be willing to discontinue use of mood or anxiety medications for the duration of their participation in the study.
If you would like more information, please view our website http://waldron.stanford.edu/~caan/ and call (650-723-5977) or email us (caan@psych.stanford.edu), and mention that you are interested in the Stress Reduction Study.
As part of a study at Stanford University, we are offering 8 sessions of a stress reduction program (either Mindfulness Meditation Based or Wellness and Fitness Based) to people with social anxiety, FREE of charge. The studys goal is to better understand the mechanisms of how these stress reduction programs can improve the lives and wellbeing of individuals who suffer from social anxiety.
We are seeking individuals who primarily have problems with social anxiety and are easily able to travel to Stanford University for assessments before and after the program. Participants must be fluent in English, right handed, age 21-55. We also ask that study participants be willing to discontinue use of mood or anxiety medications for the duration of their participation in the study.
If you would like more information, please view our website http://waldron.stanford.edu/~caan/ and call (650-723-5977) or email us (caan@psych.stanford.edu), and mention that you are interested in the Stress Reduction Study.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Has Individualism Gone Awry?
The following thoughts have come from my research on shyness and that of others, as well as my observations at the Stanford Shyness Clinic. They were first presented in a talk to the Western Psychological Association on April 15, 2005. I realized that they might be a good framing for some preliminary results of my interview study of shy leaders. Those will follow. I am hoping for a dialogue that will help us all to think of the adaptive qualities as well as the challenges of shyness. Every one of us has a temperament to manage, whether more or less outgoing, more or less impulsive, thoughtful and reflective. Most importantly we all must develop our strengths, and also develop behaviors that may be less natural, but that are important for skillful behavior in the world. We need to understand, however, that negative stereotyping of shyness in the U.S. creates a problem for normal shyness, that doesn't need to be changed.
Does shyness become a clinical problem because our society currently does not appear to value sensitivity, and cooperative and collaborative vs. dominant and aggressive behavior? I think this is a large contributor to shyness becoming a problem. It was not considered a problem in the first half of the 20th century. Shyness, particularly in males, is now negatively stereotyped in the U.S. Shy males are seen as not dominant enough, particularly in terms of traditional models of manhood. Shy females are stereotyped as traditional homemakers, not as achievers, which is fine, if that is the choice women make, but how much will they aspire to achieve outside the home if they face those stereotypes?
When someone is less competitive and more concerned about others’ evaluations, look at their motives and values as well as their behavior. They may have a value system that celebrates collaborative and communal behavior, and they may honestly care about how others feel, beyond simply being worried about how others will evaluate them. They may internalize responsibility in pro-social ways. That is, if someone is upset or distant, they may want to know if the person is offended or hurt or struggling. Pro-social behavior and sympathy toward others has been seen early in life in shy children according to Nancy Eisenberg's research. And, if shy people are concerned about evaluation, it can easily be related to the negative stereotyping of shyness in the U.S. Such negative stereotyping is, in great part, fueled by companies wanting to sell drugs to by pathologizing people with particular temperaments that are very adaptive, but not idealized in our culture. Claude Steele, at Stanford University, reveals that negative stereotyping can actually reduce the performance level of equally talented people, in comparison to the people who are not being negatively stereotyped; and that affirming the self and acceptance can increase performance. Paul Davies, Steven Spencer and Steele showed that the glass ceiling is reinforced by gender-stereotypic television commercials that persuade women to avoid leadership positions, but that providing "identity safety", that is seeing female role models reversed the effect.
I do not see many behavioral deficits in the social fitness groups at the Shyness Clinic. When people are accepted for themselves they demonstrate skilled social behavior. Phil Zimbardo's Prison Study at Stanford University showed us that we can make anyone shy, anxious, symptomatic, even terrified. Studies of terrorism and torture have made that point horrifically. The Shyness Clinic has shown me that problematic avoidance and discomfort is significantly reduced when people role play challenging situations, and that even the most socially inhibited, given the right conditions, will show us what they know. That is, reveal skilled and interpersonally effective behavior. They just need an accepting environment. Previous studies by Jonathan Cheek at Wellesley have shown that shy students who were not being evaluated did equally well on creative writing tasks as the non-shy. A pilot study I conducted with Len Horowitz suggested that shy males were better listeners than non-shy males when not under evaluative threat and told to just be themselves, but, due to small sample sizes, more research is needed in this area (in case any of you budding researchers want to conduct it).
Some people see shyness as an individual "disease". I see it as a societal problem, a constructed problem. It is our problem. When human vulnerability is denied, people go underground, don’t participate, and we lose valuable human resources. Some clinicians see shyness as a disease, a belief encouraged by drug companies. I see a culture in trouble and a lack of fit between an adaptive trait and a culture that does not value the trait.
We need to focus on and nurture the strengths of those who are shy, starting in childhood in our schools and families. We need to focus on their strengths when they come to therapy. We cannot afford to lose their participation in our democracy. Upwards of 60% of recent college student samples reports being shy. When a trait is that common it has to have adaptive qualities, particularly in a world where global collaboration is has never be more essential, in order to save the planet. Philip Zimbardo's research and his book, The Lucifer Effect, Understanding how Good People Become Evil, show us that everyone is vulnerable to potentially becoming a terrorist and a torturer, and that any of us can be bullies in small or more horrific ways. All these ways are damaging to all of us.
Shy individuals may be the leaders we need most right now. They tend to lead not for the spotlight, but because they care about about a cause, want to get something done, or care about a principle. I see them as our reluctant, socially responsible leaders of the future. Jim Collins (From Good to Great) called people like this “level five leaders”. They successfully guided companies through times of intense change and challenge. True courage means we do things in spite of being afraid, while remaining true to our basic values and ethics.
Does shyness become a clinical problem because our society currently does not appear to value sensitivity, and cooperative and collaborative vs. dominant and aggressive behavior? I think this is a large contributor to shyness becoming a problem. It was not considered a problem in the first half of the 20th century. Shyness, particularly in males, is now negatively stereotyped in the U.S. Shy males are seen as not dominant enough, particularly in terms of traditional models of manhood. Shy females are stereotyped as traditional homemakers, not as achievers, which is fine, if that is the choice women make, but how much will they aspire to achieve outside the home if they face those stereotypes?
When someone is less competitive and more concerned about others’ evaluations, look at their motives and values as well as their behavior. They may have a value system that celebrates collaborative and communal behavior, and they may honestly care about how others feel, beyond simply being worried about how others will evaluate them. They may internalize responsibility in pro-social ways. That is, if someone is upset or distant, they may want to know if the person is offended or hurt or struggling. Pro-social behavior and sympathy toward others has been seen early in life in shy children according to Nancy Eisenberg's research. And, if shy people are concerned about evaluation, it can easily be related to the negative stereotyping of shyness in the U.S. Such negative stereotyping is, in great part, fueled by companies wanting to sell drugs to by pathologizing people with particular temperaments that are very adaptive, but not idealized in our culture. Claude Steele, at Stanford University, reveals that negative stereotyping can actually reduce the performance level of equally talented people, in comparison to the people who are not being negatively stereotyped; and that affirming the self and acceptance can increase performance. Paul Davies, Steven Spencer and Steele showed that the glass ceiling is reinforced by gender-stereotypic television commercials that persuade women to avoid leadership positions, but that providing "identity safety", that is seeing female role models reversed the effect.
I do not see many behavioral deficits in the social fitness groups at the Shyness Clinic. When people are accepted for themselves they demonstrate skilled social behavior. Phil Zimbardo's Prison Study at Stanford University showed us that we can make anyone shy, anxious, symptomatic, even terrified. Studies of terrorism and torture have made that point horrifically. The Shyness Clinic has shown me that problematic avoidance and discomfort is significantly reduced when people role play challenging situations, and that even the most socially inhibited, given the right conditions, will show us what they know. That is, reveal skilled and interpersonally effective behavior. They just need an accepting environment. Previous studies by Jonathan Cheek at Wellesley have shown that shy students who were not being evaluated did equally well on creative writing tasks as the non-shy. A pilot study I conducted with Len Horowitz suggested that shy males were better listeners than non-shy males when not under evaluative threat and told to just be themselves, but, due to small sample sizes, more research is needed in this area (in case any of you budding researchers want to conduct it).
Some people see shyness as an individual "disease". I see it as a societal problem, a constructed problem. It is our problem. When human vulnerability is denied, people go underground, don’t participate, and we lose valuable human resources. Some clinicians see shyness as a disease, a belief encouraged by drug companies. I see a culture in trouble and a lack of fit between an adaptive trait and a culture that does not value the trait.
We need to focus on and nurture the strengths of those who are shy, starting in childhood in our schools and families. We need to focus on their strengths when they come to therapy. We cannot afford to lose their participation in our democracy. Upwards of 60% of recent college student samples reports being shy. When a trait is that common it has to have adaptive qualities, particularly in a world where global collaboration is has never be more essential, in order to save the planet. Philip Zimbardo's research and his book, The Lucifer Effect, Understanding how Good People Become Evil, show us that everyone is vulnerable to potentially becoming a terrorist and a torturer, and that any of us can be bullies in small or more horrific ways. All these ways are damaging to all of us.
Shy individuals may be the leaders we need most right now. They tend to lead not for the spotlight, but because they care about about a cause, want to get something done, or care about a principle. I see them as our reluctant, socially responsible leaders of the future. Jim Collins (From Good to Great) called people like this “level five leaders”. They successfully guided companies through times of intense change and challenge. True courage means we do things in spite of being afraid, while remaining true to our basic values and ethics.
I admire the following quotes, both by shy men:
The future depends on what we do in the present.
Mahatma Gandhi
Try not to become a man of success but a man of value.
Albert Einstein
The future depends on what we do in the present.
Mahatma Gandhi
Try not to become a man of success but a man of value.
Albert Einstein
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
The Henderson/Zimbardo Shyness Questionnaire, the ShyQ.
Our ShyQ.is on the shyness.com website, under research papers in 2002. There you will find stats and reliability, validity data on the questionnaire. We have used it for adolescent populations, whose results are similar to our college student samples and to our website respondents. I think you could use it for adolescent research studies. A copy of the questionnaire is under shyness surveys on the Shyness Institute page. You can respond to it yourself if you like.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
My view of shyness
Blog 2
In this post I am going to talk a little about shyness and the way I see it.
Tomkins, an early emotion researcher, found that shyness is a basic human emotion, a blend of fear and interest. We experience it in new situations, situations that are important for survival, like mating situations, work situations, and those where we are being evaluated. Only seven percent of the population says they never experience shyness. I wonder how much of that is a self-enhancing personality trait, because shyness is not fashionable in our society (although that may be changing with the popularity and success of the geek culture). Jerome Kagan and Nancy Sidman found that some children are born with a slightly more sensitive arousal system. These children are a bit more likely to develop habitual shyness, a personality trait. However, for any given child it is impossible to predict who will become shy because so much of our personality styles are due to the environments in which we develop. With warm, empathic parenting and the expectation that a child participate in age appropriate activities, children may not become habitually shy. Another interesting finding is that sensitivity is often associated with being intellectually gifted. I’ll write more on this in future posts. Many shy people do well in advanced education, perhaps due to their ability to work alone. Many also become effective “niche pickers”, (a term coined by a psychologist whose name evades me). Being an effective “niche picker” simply means that people will often choose optimal situations for their personality styles. Shy people may choose collaborative environments where intense competition is not valued, and people work for a common goal without excessive regard for status, often what are termed “lean mean teams”, with people operating independently and together in a flexible way, where every voice on the team is considered to be important.
Some people become problematically shy, in that their shyness interferes with meeting life goals in social relationships and work settings. A small percentage may go on to experience more debilitating emotional pain and avoidance, which is called social anxiety disorder, around 13% of the population, and, with high avoidance levels, according to the diagnostic and statistical manual, avoidant personality disorder. It is correlated with introversion, but many shy people are extraverted. Paul Pilkonis and Philip Zimbardo discovered in the 70’s that there were two types of shyness, public and private. Those with public shyness could be identified by others as quiet or non-assertive. Although, the authors also found that whether or not someone was shy was often hard to identify, with fellow college students being accurate only around 15% of the time. Those with private shyness were socially skilled and outgoing, but felt that, if people really knew them, they would be found wanting. I believe that we all feel that way, that these are basic issues around being human, but, again, in our competitive, materialistic society, people are often not willing to disclose human experiences because they fear they will be devalued, which can often be the case, particularly by self-enhancers who believe they are “better” than they actually are. Some of these patterns may change with the influence of
Eastern thought, meditation, mindfulness classes, and compassion-focused views of the human condition. Researchers, such as Paul Gilbert in England, are working on these ideas. Gilbert has an evolutionary biopsychosocial theory that he is applying to treatment for depression, but also to the human condition, which means all of us.
I have been focused recently on the strengths of shyness. I will share some preliminary findings with you next time from my interview study of shy leaders.
In this post I am going to talk a little about shyness and the way I see it.
Tomkins, an early emotion researcher, found that shyness is a basic human emotion, a blend of fear and interest. We experience it in new situations, situations that are important for survival, like mating situations, work situations, and those where we are being evaluated. Only seven percent of the population says they never experience shyness. I wonder how much of that is a self-enhancing personality trait, because shyness is not fashionable in our society (although that may be changing with the popularity and success of the geek culture). Jerome Kagan and Nancy Sidman found that some children are born with a slightly more sensitive arousal system. These children are a bit more likely to develop habitual shyness, a personality trait. However, for any given child it is impossible to predict who will become shy because so much of our personality styles are due to the environments in which we develop. With warm, empathic parenting and the expectation that a child participate in age appropriate activities, children may not become habitually shy. Another interesting finding is that sensitivity is often associated with being intellectually gifted. I’ll write more on this in future posts. Many shy people do well in advanced education, perhaps due to their ability to work alone. Many also become effective “niche pickers”, (a term coined by a psychologist whose name evades me). Being an effective “niche picker” simply means that people will often choose optimal situations for their personality styles. Shy people may choose collaborative environments where intense competition is not valued, and people work for a common goal without excessive regard for status, often what are termed “lean mean teams”, with people operating independently and together in a flexible way, where every voice on the team is considered to be important.
Some people become problematically shy, in that their shyness interferes with meeting life goals in social relationships and work settings. A small percentage may go on to experience more debilitating emotional pain and avoidance, which is called social anxiety disorder, around 13% of the population, and, with high avoidance levels, according to the diagnostic and statistical manual, avoidant personality disorder. It is correlated with introversion, but many shy people are extraverted. Paul Pilkonis and Philip Zimbardo discovered in the 70’s that there were two types of shyness, public and private. Those with public shyness could be identified by others as quiet or non-assertive. Although, the authors also found that whether or not someone was shy was often hard to identify, with fellow college students being accurate only around 15% of the time. Those with private shyness were socially skilled and outgoing, but felt that, if people really knew them, they would be found wanting. I believe that we all feel that way, that these are basic issues around being human, but, again, in our competitive, materialistic society, people are often not willing to disclose human experiences because they fear they will be devalued, which can often be the case, particularly by self-enhancers who believe they are “better” than they actually are. Some of these patterns may change with the influence of
Eastern thought, meditation, mindfulness classes, and compassion-focused views of the human condition. Researchers, such as Paul Gilbert in England, are working on these ideas. Gilbert has an evolutionary biopsychosocial theory that he is applying to treatment for depression, but also to the human condition, which means all of us.
I have been focused recently on the strengths of shyness. I will share some preliminary findings with you next time from my interview study of shy leaders.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Welcome to the Shyness Institute Blog
Welcome, friends, to the Shyness Institute Blog. In this blog I will be writing my thoughts about shyness, both new research and ideas about Social Fitness. As that name suggests, I am a big fan of getting away from the medical model. Shyness is not a disease that needs to be treated, but a temperament that has strengths and vulnerabilities like any other. Social fitness, like physical fitness, involves daily workouts and practice, emphasizing one's strengths and developing new behaviors when they are helpful in a particular situation. Social interaction is negotiated and no one is a perfection social performer. We can all learn and, if we are open, we can learn together.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
