Social Development Vol 22 No.

3 522–538 August 2013

doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9507.2012.00671.x

Going It Alone: Comparing Subtypes of

Withdrawal on Indices of Adjustment and
Maladjustment in Emerging Adulthood
Larry J. Nelson, Brigham Young University

Abstract
Scholars have distinguished conceptually between multiple forms of social with-
drawal among children and adolescents, but this distinction has yet to be investi-
gated fully during emerging adulthood. Therefore, the overarching goal of this study
was to employ a person-oriented approach to examine differences between subtypes
of withdrawal on indicators of internalizing issues and relationships in emerging
adulthood. The sample for the current study (Mage = 19.60, SD = 1.85, range =
18–29) consisted of 791 undergraduate students (548 women, 243 men). Results
revealed that three distinct forms of social withdrawal (shyness, avoidance, unso-
ciable) can be identified in emerging adulthood, with each one uniquely related to
indices of maladjustment in regard to internalizing problems and relationship diffi-
culties. In general, both shy and avoidant individuals reported more problems of an
internalizing nature and in their relationships. Far fewer problems appear to exist
for unsociable individuals.

Keywords: emerging adulthood; shyness; internalizing/externalizing

Introduction
Emerging adulthood is a time when young people start the process of becoming
self-reliant, autonomous individuals capable of independent decision making and
actions. In doing so, emerging adults often find themselves in new social settings (e.g.,
college classrooms, workplace) in which they encounter several different types of
peers. As a result, there might be developmental implications for personal well-being
and social adjustment for individuals who either struggle in or choose to avoid these
social contexts. Indeed, there is growing evidence that shyness in emerging adulthood
may be problematic (e.g., Nelson et al., 2008). However, shyness, or fear, may be just
one reason why individuals withdraw from social interaction. Scholars have distin-
guished conceptually between multiple forms of withdrawal among children and
adolescents (see, Coplan & Rubin, 2010, for a review); however, the possibility of there

Correspondence should be addressed to Larry J. Nelson, School of Family Life, Brigham Young
University, 2091 JFSB, Provo, UT 84602, USA. Email: larry_nelson@byu.edu

© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

 Social Withdrawal in Emerging Adulthood 523
being multiple motivations for why one withdraws has yet to be investigated fully
during emerging adulthood, which, again, is a time during which social interaction
(e.g., roommates, romantic partners, co-workers, classmates) may be particularly
important for successful development. Therefore, the overarching goal of this study
was to employ a person-oriented approach to examine differences between subtypes
of withdrawal on indicators of internalizing issues and relationships in emerging
adulthood.

Subtypes of Social Withdrawal

Despite the importance of the extant evidence pointing to the notion that shyness might
be a risk factor during emerging adulthood, nearly all of the work conducted with
samples of emerging adults has used global and differing definitions of shyness. For
example, some researchers have focused on the emotional component of shyness (e.g.,
fear; e.g., ‘I feel tense when I am with people I don’t know well’; Mounts, Valentiner,
Anderson, & Boswell, 2006). Others have attempted to incorporate both the emotions
(i.e., fear, anxiety, etc.) and cognitions associated with shyness (e.g., ‘I feel painfully
self-conscious when I’m around strangers’; Melchior & Cheek, 1990). Still, others
have focused on the more behavioral components of shyness with items such as
‘talkative’ (reverse coded), ‘quiet’, ‘outgoing’ (reverse coded), and ‘shy’ (e.g., Nelson
et al., 2008). These few examples show the range in definitions used to study ‘shyness’
in emerging adulthood. Each of them captures slightly different aspects of what has
been termed a ‘multifaceted’ concept (e.g., Bowker & Raja, 2011), but they do not
provide a unified approach to the study of the specific construct of shyness, let alone
the broader construct of social withdrawal.
The term social withdrawal is considered an ‘umbrella construct’ capturing internal
motivations for removing oneself from social interaction (Coplan & Rubin, 2010).
Approach–avoidance models of social withdrawal (Asendorpf, 1990, 1993; Gray,
1972) are useful in understanding why individuals may withdraw from social settings.
According to such conceptual models, shy individuals want to interact (high-approach
motive) but simultaneously experience wariness, fear, and anxiety (high-avoidance
motive). Others, referred to as unsociable are believed to withdraw due to a low
approach (but also low avoidance) tendency. In other words, they are not afraid of
interacting and do not actively avoid others per se but are simply less interested in
initiating interactions with peers. Finally, some individuals actively avoid social inter-
actions due to high-avoidance and low-approach motivations. Employing approach–
avoidance models in the study of social withdrawal is proving useful as work in early
childhood (Coplan, Prakash, O’Neil, & Armer, 2004), middle childhood (Coplan et al.,
in press), and adolescence (Bowker & Raja, 2011) has demonstrated that each form of
withdrawal appears to be uniquely identifiable and associated with varying indicators
of maladjustment.
For example, work with young children, and emerging work in middle childhood
(e.g., Coplan et al., in press) and adolescence (Bowker & Raja, 2011), has found
shyness to be linked to numerous internalizing problems (e.g., sadness, loneliness,
depressive symptoms, anxiety, low self-perceptions) and problems with peer relation-
ships (e.g., rejection, victimization; Bowker & Raja, 2011; Coplan et al., 2008). Com-
pared to shyness, unsociability has received much less attention, but evidence suggests
that unsociable children do not experience the internalizing problems indicative of
shyness (e.g., Bowker & Raja, 2011; Coplan & Weeks, 2010), but they may still
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social Development, 22, 3, 2013
524 Larry J. Nelson
experience some problems in the peer group compared to more socially outgoing peers
(e.g., Coplan & Armer, 2007). Thus, the scant work on unsociability suggests that it is
much more ‘benign’ than shyness but not without challenges in peer relationships.
Avoidance, on the other hand, is thought to be much worse possibly in its impact on
adaptive development. With the exception of recent work (e.g., Bowker & Raja, 2011;
Kim, Rapee, Oh, & Moon, 2008), avoidance has remained largely unstudied since
Asendorpf (1990) postulated that these individuals not only desire solitude but actively
seek to avoid social interaction. However, recent work has found avoidance to be
related to loneliness and peer exclusion (Bowker & Raja, 2011), providing initial
evidence that it is indeed a risk factor for internalizing problems and peer relationship
problems.

Subtypes of Social Withdrawal Beyond Childhood and Adolescence

Despite early attempts to distinguish between different forms of withdrawal (e.g.,
fearfulness and sociability; Cheek & Buss, 1981; preference for solitude, Eysenck,
1947, 1956), there is surprisingly little work in emerging adulthood that attempts to
identify and examine multiple forms of withdrawal. There is an existing body of
longitudinal work showing that shyness early in life predicts negative outcomes in
emerging and young adulthood including introversion and cautiousness (Kagan &
Moss, 1962), unassertiveness, depression, and fewer sources of social support (Caspi,
2000), and delayed entry into adult roles (e.g., marriage, parenthood, and stable
careers; Asendorpf, Denissen, & van Aken, 2008; Caspi, Elder, & Bem, 1988; Kerr,
Lambert, & Bem, 1996). It should be noted that much of this longitudinal work
examined cohorts born in the 1920s (e.g., Caspi et al., 1988) or 1950s (e.g., Kerr et al.,
1996) and examined outcomes in individuals over the age of 30, and most notably for
the purposes of this study, used more global assessments of shyness rather than
distinguishing between multiple forms of withdrawal.
In a recent study, researchers compared Australian and Korean emerging adults’
retrospective assessment of their shyness and unsociability in adolescence (Kim et al.,
2008). These retrospective accounts were then linked to functioning in emerging
adulthood. Although informative, retrospective and longitudinal studies do not expli-
cate how shyness experienced during emerging adulthood may impact the attitudes,
beliefs, and behaviors of individuals currently in this stage. It is important to examine
the implications of various forms of withdrawal in the context of the unique features of
a time period. For example, emerging adults explore their identities by trying out
different jobs, pursuing an education, and having multiple relationships, but if shy and
avoidant individuals find it difficult to talk to strangers, they may struggle in these
settings. Likewise, the residential instability typical of this time period might be
particularly stressful for these individuals given the social interactions required in
dealing with landlords and roommates.
Taken together, the unique features of emerging adulthood necessitate work that
examines social withdrawal during this stage. To date, there is a dearth of work that
examines how different subtypes of social withdrawal may be linked to aspects of
adjustment and maladjustment in emerging adulthood. As noted previously, in work
examining children and adolescents, social withdrawal (especially shyness) has repeat-
edly been linked to numerous internalizing problems and problems with peer relation-
ships. Therefore, it was thought necessary to examine aspects of internalizing issues
and relationships that would be particularly relevant to this age period. Specifically, a
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social Development, 22, 3, 2013
 Social Withdrawal in Emerging Adulthood 525
broad range of variables that might be indicative of problems of an internalizing nature
were selected for the study including self-esteem, fear of negative evaluation, social
comparisons, depression, emotional dysregulation, self-harm, and suicidal ideations.
Furthermore, it would be important to examine whether there might be gender
differences in regard to internalizing issues and relationships for various types of social
withdrawal. Previous work has found more negative outcomes for shy men than for shy
women (Caspi et al., 1988; Kerr et al., 1996), but much of this work, as noted previ-
ously, was conducted with data that are now decades old which may not capture the
changes that have occurred for women in Western societies. Indeed, more recent work
(e.g., Nelson et al., 2008) has found fewer gender differences. It may be that today’s
woman is faced with many if not all of the same challenges as men in regard to the need
to interact socially in various contexts (e.g., work place, classroom) and with various
people (e.g., professors, employers, roommates, romantic partners). Although the
importance of social interaction may be the same for men and women in today’s
society, the correlates and outcomes of being socially withdrawn may differ by gender.
Therefore, it is important to examine the role that gender may play in examining the
differences between subtypes of withdrawal and indicators of internalizing issues and
relationships.
Finally, approach–avoidance models of social withdrawal (Asendorpf, 1990, 1993;
Gray, 1972) point to the need to identify why individuals may withdraw from social
settings, positing that individual variation in why one withdraws is a function of
specific combinations of social-approach and social-avoidance motivations. As a
result, employing a person-centered approach, rather than a variable-centered
approach, has been successful (e.g., Coplan & Weeks, 2010; Coplan et al., in press) to
identifying subgroups of socially withdrawn children based on specific combinations
of social approach and avoidance motivations.
Taken together, the overarching goal of this study was to employ a person-oriented
approach to examine differences between subtypes of withdrawal on internalizing
issues (i.e., self-esteem, fear of negative evaluation, social comparisons, depression,
emotional dysregulation, self-harm, suicidal ideations) and relationships (i.e., relation-
ship quality with best friend, romantic partner, mother, and father) in emerging adult-
hood, and to examine how these may differ based on gender. Based on the conceptual
and empirical literature reviewed previously, it was expected that when compared with
their more sociable peers, (1) both shy and, to a greater extent, avoidant individuals
would experience problems of an internalizing nature, and in their relationships, and
(2) unsociable individuals, though not differing from the comparison group in inter-
nalizing problems, would report lower levels of adjustment in regard to relationships
due to their low need to be with other people.

Method
Participants
Participants in the current study (Mage = 19.60, SD = 1.85, range = 18–29) included 791
undergraduate students (548 women, 243 men). Participants were recruited from four
universities across the USA. Response rates varied by site (ranging from 50–71 percent)
with an overall response rate of approximately 60 percent. The majority of emerging
adults were European-American (69 percent European-American, 3 percent African-
American, 17 percent Asian-American, 5 percent Latino-American, and 3 percent
mixed/biracial) and living outside of their parents’ homes (90 percent). Emerging adults
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social Development, 22, 3, 2013
526 Larry J. Nelson
reported that 60 percent of fathers and 35 percent of mothers reported having a
bachelor’s degree or more. They also reported that 23 percent of parents had a combined
income of less than $50 000 per year, and 28 percent reported their parents having a
combined income of over $100 000.

Procedure
Participants were recruited through faculty’s announcement of the study in under-
graduate courses. Professors at the various universities were provided with a handout
to give to their students that had a brief explanation of the study and directions for
accessing the online survey. Interested students then accessed the study website with a
class-specific recruitment code. Informed consent was obtained online, and only after
consent was given could the participants begin the questionnaires. Each participant
was given a survey that took approximately 45 minutes to complete. Most participants
were given a $20 Amazon gift code for their participation whereas participants from
one institution were offered extra credit for their participation.

Measures
As noted, all measures were collected via the Internet. Because of the number of items
in the survey, some variables (noted below) were measured using shortened versions of
established measures (e.g., self-perception profile, Neeman & Harter, 1986; brief fear
of negative evaluation scale, Leary, 1983). In these cases, items with the highest factor
loadings (based on published information or pilot testing) were selected for inclusion
in data collection.

Social Withdrawal Subtypes and Peer Isolation. Participants completed a 20-item

revised version of the child social preference scale (CSPS). This measure was origi-
nally designed for use with young children (Coplan et al., 2004) and then revised for
use with adolescents (Bowker & Raja, 2011). It was revised for the study to be more
developmentally appropriate for use with emerging adults. For example, items in the
child and adolescent measures frequently use the term ‘play’ or ‘playing’ (e.g., ‘prefer
to play with kids than alone’, ‘I like to play with others, but am nervous to’). In revising
the measure for use with emerging adults, a broader range of settings for social
interaction was used (e.g., ‘I prefer working with others rather than alone’, ‘I’d like to
hang out with other people, but I’m sometimes nervous to’, ‘I feel nervous at parties
and other social settings’). Questions were answered on a 5-point scale ranging from 1
(strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Results from exploratory factor analyses are
reported below.

Self-esteem. To measure self-esteem, participants answered questions from the self-

worth subscale of the self perceptions profile for college students (Neeman & Harter,
1986). Five questions were answered on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all true
for me) to 4 (very true for me). Sample questions include, ‘I am often disappointed with
myself’, and ‘I am happy being the way I am’. Negatively worded items were reversed
scored so that higher scores reflected higher levels of self-esteem. The internal con-
sistency of the scale revealed adequate reliability (a = .84).

Depression. Participants answered eight questions from the original CES-D scale
(Radloff, 1977) in order to assess depression levels. Questions were answered on a
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social Development, 22, 3, 2013
 Social Withdrawal in Emerging Adulthood 527
3-point scale ranging from 1 (never) to 3 (most of the time). Sample questions include,
‘I felt everything I did was an effort’, and ‘I felt sad’. The internal consistency of the
scale revealed adequate reliability (a = .73).

Self-harm and Suicidal Ideations. To assess self-harm, the single item ‘Engage in
deliberate self-harm (e.g. cutting)’ was used. To assess suicidal ideations, the single
item ‘Think about committing suicide’ was used. Participants responded to items on a
6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (none) to 5 (every day or almost every day).

Fear of Negative Evaluation. In order to measure fear of negative reactions from

others, three questions from the ‘brief fear of negative evaluation scale’ (Leary, 1983)
were used. Participants answered questions on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly
disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Sample questions include, ‘I am afraid others will not
approve of me’, and ‘When I am talking to someone, I worry about what he or she may
be thinking about me’. The internal consistency of the scale revealed moderate reli-
ability (a = .62).

Emotional Dysregulation. In order to measure emotional self dysregulation, partici-

pants answered five questions on the emotional self-regulation subscale (Novak &
Clayton, 2001). Participants answered questions on a 5-point scale ranging from 1
(never true) to 5 (always true). Sample questions include, ‘I get upset easily’, and ‘I
slam doors when I am mad’. The internal consistency of the scale revealed adequate
reliability (a = .83).

Social Comparisons. To measure the extent to which participants compare themselves

to others, questions were taken from the inclusion of other in the self scale (Aron, Aron,
& Smollan, 1992). Participant’s answered two questions on a 5-point scale ranging
from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Questions included, ‘I find that I often
look to certain other people to see how I compare to others’, and ‘When I am not
certain about how well I am doing at something, I usually like to be around others so
I can compare myself to them’. The items were strongly correlated (r = .69) and
therefore summed to provide a score for social comparisons.

Relationship Quality. In order to assess the relationship quality with parents (mother
and father, respectively), a romantic partner, and a best friend, 12 items from the social
provisions questionnaire (Carbery & Buhrmester, 1998) were used. Participants
answered questions on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (little or none) to 5 (the most).
Items (e.g., ‘How happy are you with the way things are between you and this person?’)
were summed to provide an overall score for relationship quality with each person
(mother, a = .93; father, a = .95; romantic partner, a = .98; best friend, a = .96),
respectively.

Results
All 20 CSPS-R items were subjected to an exploratory factor analysis using principal-
axis factoring with oblique (promax) rotation. The scree plot (Cattell, 1966) suggested
that a four-factor solution was most appropriate, and only four factors emerged with
eigenvalues over 1.00. These four factors were referred to as shyness (6 items; a = .91;
e.g., ‘I feel tense in social situations’), avoidant (six items; a = .82; e.g., ‘I don’t really
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social Development, 22, 3, 2013
528 Larry J. Nelson
like being with other people and prefer to be alone’), unsociabilty (four items; a = .62;
e.g., ‘I’m just as happy to be by myself as with other people’), and isolation (four items;
a = .89; e.g., ‘I’d like to hang out with other people, but I’m often excluded’). These
four factors accounted for 64.68 percent of the total variance (see Table 1 for final
pattern loadings and items) including 35.82 percent by the shyness factor (eigenvalue
= 7.16), 14.17 percent by the avoidance factor (eigenvalue = 2.83), 7.84 percent by the
isolation factor (eigenvalue = 1.57), and 6.85 percent by the unsociability factor
(eigenvalue = 1.37). Factor loadings ranged from .41 to .93 with no items cross-loading
higher than .39. There were small to moderate significant correlations between factors
(see Table 2). Taken together, these results suggest that although the factors tap a
similar construct (i.e., withdrawal), they each represent distinct dimensions of that
construct. The isolation subscale was not used in the rest of the analyses because
isolation represents an external reason for solitude (i.e., others exclude the isolated
individual) whereas shyness, unsociability, and avoidance represent internal reasons
for the solitude.
Table 2 displays correlations between each form of withdrawal and the rest of the
variables employed in the study. In order to examine differences between each form
of withdrawal as well as non-withdrawn individuals, groups were formed according
to the following criteria. Those individuals who scored in the top quartile for shyness
and in the bottom three quartiles for avoidance and unsociability formed the shy
group (N = 100). Those who scored in the top quartile for avoidance and the bottom
three quartiles for shyness and unsociability formed the avoidant group (N = 64).
Those who scored in the top quartile for unsociability and the bottom three quartiles
for shyness and avoidance formed the unsociable group (N = 79). Finally, those who
fell in the bottom three quartiles for all forms of withdrawal comprised the non-
withdrawn control group (N = 391). A portion of the sample (157 participants) did
not fit into any of the groups because participants fell in the top quartile of two or
more groups including 5 percent high in both unsociability and shyness, 6 percent
high in both unsociability and avoidance, 3 percent high in both shyness and avoid-
ance, and 4 percent high in all three groups. These participants were not included in
any further analyses.

Differences in Withdrawn Subtypes

Two multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVAs) were conducted to determine
whether there were differences in emerging adults’ internalizing characteristics and
relationships as a function of subtype of social withdrawal. In the first MANOVA, the
independent variables were the subtypes of withdrawal (shy, avoidant, unsociable,
control group) and gender. The dependent variables were internalizing characteristics
including self-esteem, fear of negative evaluation, depression, social comparisons,
self-harm, suicidal ideations, and emotional dysregulation. Results revealed a signifi-
cant main effect for gender, F(7, 619) = 4.79, p < .01, and type of social withdrawal,
F(21, 1778) = 11.43, p < .01, as well as a significant interaction between withdrawn
groups and gender, F(21, 1778) = 1.94, p < .01.
The significant interaction between Group X Gender was found for self-worth, F(3,
625) = 3.72, p < .05, and social comparisons, F(3, 625) = 3.14, p < .05. In order to
interpret these interactions, the univariate analyses were conducted for these two
variables for males and females separately. For males, results indicated that significant
differences as a function of withdrawn group existed for self-worth, F(3, 190) = 15.29,
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social Development, 22, 3, 2013
 Table 1. Results of Principal Axis Factor Analyses of the Emerging Adult Social Preference Scale-revised

Factor

Item Shy Unsociable Avoidant Isolated

© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

I tend to be shy. .87 .12 -.03 -.11
I’d like to hang out with other people, but I’m sometimes nervous to. .87 .01 -.09 -.05
Although I desire to talk to and be with other people, I feel nervous about interacting .84 -.09 .03 .09
with them.
I feel tense in social situations. .80 -.06 .07 .10
Sometimes I turn down chances to hang out with other people because I feel too shy. .75 .12 -.04 .02
I feel nervous at parties and other social settings. .74 .02 .00 .12
I’m just as happy to be by myself as with other people. .00 .80 -.17 -.07
I don’t really mind spending time alone. .15 .76 -.04 -.24
I don’t have a strong need to be with other people. -.12 .48 .22 .25
I like spending time alone more than I like spending time with other people. .07 .41 .38 .23
I like to be with people. (reversed) -.04 -.12 .91 .04
I am the happiest when I am hanging out with other people. (reversed) -.11 -.01 .89 -.01
When given the choice, I prefer to do something with others than to be alone. (reversed) -.10 .02 .76 -.06
I welcome the opportunity to mix socially with people. (reversed) .29 -.32 .67 -.07
I prefer working with others rather than alone. (reversed) .04 .00 .67 -.25
I don’t really like being with other people and prefer being alone. .06 .33 .52 .13
I want to hang out with others but often they don’t want to be with me. -.02 -.06 -.04 .93
Sometimes people don’t want me to hang out with them. -.01 -.03 -.09 .91
I wish I could spend more time with other people, but they won’t let me. .03 -.16 -.03 .88
I’d like to hang out with other people, but I’m often excluded. .21 .05 -.12 .71

Primary loadings are in boldface.

Social Development, 22, 3, 2013

Social Withdrawal in Emerging Adulthood 529
530 Larry J. Nelson

Table 2. Correlations between Each Subtype of Withdrawal and Other Subtypes

of Withdrawal and Other Study Variables

Shy Unsociable Avoidant

Shy - .30** .33**

Unsociable .30** - .27**
Avoidant .33** .45** -
Isolated .63** .27** .28**
Self-esteem -.43** -.05 -.27**
Fear of negative evaluation .42** -.08** -.05
Depression .29** .07* .14**
Social comparisons .18** .01 -.11**
Self-harm .05 .06 .11**
Suicidal ideations .14** .06 .13**
Self-regulations .21** .05 .17**
Relationship quality—best friend -.22** -.09* -.26**
Relationship quality—romantic partner -.26** -.06 -.15**
Relationship quality—mother -.15** .02 -.16**
Relationship quality—father -.14** -.01 -.19**

* p < .05, ** p < .01.

p < .01, h2 = .19, and social comparisons, F(3, 190) = 17.25, p < .01, h2 = .21. For
self-worth, post hoc comparisons (LSD) revealed that both the shy (M = 2.89, SD = .76)
and avoidant (M = 2.81, SD = .63) groups of men reported significantly lower scores
than the unsociable (M = 3.40, SD = .63) and control (M = 3.45, SD = .50) groups of
men. For social comparisons, avoidant men (M = 2.67, SD = .79) reported lower scores
than all the groups (unsocial, M = 3.63., SD = .51; shy, M = 3.97, SD = .77; comparison,
M = 3.56, SD = .80), and the shy men reported higher levels than the control group. For
females, results indicated that significant differences as a function of withdrawn group
existed for self-worth, F(3, 435) = 14.69, p < .01, h2 = .09 and social comparisons, F(3,
436) = 7.43, p < .01, h2 = .05. For self-worth, post hoc comparisons (LSD) revealed
that the control group of women (M = 3.47, SD = .47) reported higher scores than all
of the groups (unsocial, M = 3.32., SD = .62; shy, M = 3.04, SD = .51; avoidant, M =
3.26, SD = .56), and the unsociable group scored higher than the shy group of women.
For social comparisons, shy women (M = 3.94, SD = .58) reported higher scores than
all the groups (unsocial, M = 3.41., SD = .96; comparison, M = 3.55, SD = .81;
avoidant, M = 3.26, SD = .81).
To examine the main effects found for gender, subsequent univariate analyses
indicated a significant effect of gender existed for fear of self-esteem, F(1, 624) = 4.29,
p < .05, and fear of negative evaluation, F(1, 624) = 10.18, p < .01. Because self-esteem
was part of a significant interaction, the gender effect for this variable was not probed
further. Examination of means for fear of negative evaluation showed that women
(M = 3.37, SD = .84) rated themselves higher in fear of negative evaluation than did
men (M = 3.10, SD = .86).
To examine the main effects found for withdrawn groups, subsequent univariate
analyses indicated a significant effect existed for self-worth, F(3, 629) = 29.35, p <
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social Development, 22, 3, 2013
 Social Withdrawal in Emerging Adulthood 531

Table 3. Comparisons of Withdrawn and Control Groups on Internalizing

Characteristics

Shy Unsociable Avoidant Control

M SD M SD M SD M SD F

Self-esteem 3.00bd .59 3.34ac .62 3.01bd .64 3.46ac .47 25.01**
Fear of negative 3.99bcd .67 2.92ad .90 2.96a .68 3.19ab .81 33.48**
evaluation
Depression 1.67d .36 1.61d .42 1.63d .42 1.49abc .35 10.20**
Social 3.95bcd .64 3.48ac .86 2.95abd .84 3.54ac .83 18.49**
comparisons
Self-harm 1.02c .14 1.13c .61 1.47abd 1.15 1.05c .36 11.79**
Suicidal 1.26cd .75 1.23c .78 1.58abd 1.27 1.10ac .45 8.96**
ideations
Emotional 2.34d .76 2.13c .82 2.53bd .93 2.09ac .68 7.86**
dysregulation
a
Significantly different from Shy.
b
Significantly different from Unsociable.
c
Significantly different from Avoidant.
d
Significantly different from Control.
* p < .05, ** p < .01.

.01, h2 = .12, fear of negative evaluation, F(3, 630) = 37.38, p < .01, h2 = .15,
depression, F(3, 630) = 9.29, p < .01, h2 = .04, social comparisons, F(3, 630) =
21.21, p < .01, h2 = .09, self-harm, F(3, 630) = 13.07, p < .01, h2 = .06, suicidal
ideations, F(3, 630) = 9.78, p < .01, h2 = .04, and emotional regulation, F(1, 630) =
8.31, p < .01, h2 = .04. Because self-esteem and social comparisons were part of
significant interactions, univariate group effects for these variables were not probed
further. Post hoc comparisons (LSD) revealed that the shy group reported signifi-
cantly higher scores on fear of negative evaluation than all of the other groups. (See
Table 3 for a list of means and standard deviations for all of the variables.) The
unsociable group scored significantly lower than both the shy and control groups. For
depression, the control group reported significantly lower scores than all of the
groups. For self-harm, the avoidant group reported significantly higher scores than all
of the groups. For suicidal ideations, the avoidant group reported significantly higher
scores than all of the groups, and the shy group had significantly higher scores than
the control group. Finally, for emotional dysregulation, both the shy and avoidant
groups reported significantly higher scores than the control group, and the avoidant
group had a higher score than the unsociable group.
In the second MANOVA, the independent variables were the subtypes of withdrawal
and gender. The dependent variables were self-report ratings of the quality of one’s
relationship with best friend, romantic partner, mother, and father. It should be noted
that not all participants reported have a romantic partner. Those who self-reported as
not dating at all included 53 percent of the shy group, 31 percent of the avoidant group,
34 percent of the unsociable group, and 30 percent of the average group. Results
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social Development, 22, 3, 2013
532 Larry J. Nelson
revealed a significant main effect for gender, F(4, 617) = 15.52, p < .01, and withdrawn
group, F(12, 1847) = 6.10, p < .01. The interaction between withdrawn groups and
gender was not significant. Subsequent univariate analyses indicated a significant
effect of gender existed for relationship quality with best friend, F(1, 619) = 23.27,
p < .001, and mother, F(1, 619) = 31.16, p < .01. For relationship quality with best
friend, examination of means showed that women (M = 3.90, SD = .83) reported greater
relationship quality than did men (M = 3.54, SD = .93). For relationships quality with
mother, women (M = 3.82, SD = .85) reported greater relationship quality than did men
(M = 3.41, SD = .86).
For withdrawn groups, subsequent univariate analyses indicated significant effects
existed for relationship quality with best friend, F(3, 630) = 10.68, p < .01, h2 = .05,
romantic partner, F(3, 624) = 5.30, p < .01, h2 = .03, mother, F(3, 630) = 11.97, p <
.01, h2 = .05, and father, F(3, 629) = 11.22, p < 01, h2 = .05. (See Table 4 for a list of
means and standard deviations.) Post hoc comparisons (LSD) revealed that both the
shy and avoidant groups reported significantly lower relationship quality with best
friend than the unsociable and control groups. For relationship quality with romantic
partner, both the shy and avoidant groups reported significantly lower quality than the
control group. The shy group reported lower scores than the unsociable group. For
relationship quality with mother both the shy and avoidant groups reported signifi-
cantly lower quality than the unsociable and control groups. Finally, for relationship
quality with father, the avoidant group reported lower scores than all of the groups. The
shy group reported lower scores than the control group.

Discussion
The goal of this study was to employ a person-oriented approach to examine dif-
ferences between subtypes of withdrawal on indicators of internalizing issues and
relationships in emerging adulthood and to examine how these may differ based on
gender. Results suggest that three distinct forms of social withdrawal (shyness,
avoidance, unsociable) based on different approach–avoidance motivations can be
identified in emerging adulthood with each one uniquely related to indices of mal-
adjustment. In general, findings tended to support hypotheses that both shy and
avoidant individuals experience problems of an internalizing nature and in their
relationships. However, hypotheses were generally not supported in regard to unso-
ciable individuals who were hypothesized not to differ from the comparison group
in internalizing problems but to have lower levels of adjustment in regard to
relationships.
These results make a number of significant contributions to our understanding of
social withdrawal in emerging adulthood. Firstly, they underscore the importance of
examining the motivations for withdrawn behavior. Although there have been some
attempts to distinguish between social and fearful motivations (e.g., Cheek & Buss,
1981) and preference for solitude (Eysenck, 1947, 1956) in emerging adulthood and
adulthood, little, if any, work has examined more recently the concurrent motivations
of shyness, unsociability, and avoidance. Indeed, researchers have examined shyness in
emerging adulthood but ignored the fact that people may withdraw from social inter-
actions for a variety of reasons. Hence, a significant contribution of this study is that
it highlights the importance of examining social motivations by showing that the
various subtypes of social withdrawal can be identified and distinguished as unique and
distinct constructs in emerging adulthood.
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social Development, 22, 3, 2013
 © 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Table 4. Comparisons of Withdrawn and Control Groups on Relationship Quality with Peers and Parents

Shy Unsociable Avoidant Control

M SD M SD M SD M SD F

Relationship quality—best friend 3.65bd .84 3.95ac .84 3.40bd 1.12 3.96ac .77 9.07**
Relationship quality—romantic partner 3.32bd 1.36 3.73a 1.22 3.40d 1.31 3.78ac 1.17 4.69**
Relationship quality—mother 3.50bd .90 3.93ac .74 3.25bd 1.04 3.81ac .82 8.70**
Relationship quality—father 3.16cd .91 3.36c .99 2.70abd 1.05 3.41ac .92 10.91**
a
Significantly different from Shy.
b
Significantly different from Unsociable.
c
Significantly different from Avoidant.
d
Significantly different from Control.
* p < .05, ** p < .01.

Social Development, 22, 3, 2013

Social Withdrawal in Emerging Adulthood 533
534 Larry J. Nelson

Shy and Avoidant Subtypes

In support of hypotheses, shy and avoidant individuals appear to be at-risk for a number
of internalizing and relationship problems. Specifically, results for shy individuals
revealed that they struggled with self-worth, fear of negative evaluations from others,
depression, social comparisons, suicidal ideations, and emotional dysregulation. For
avoidant individuals, results reflect problems in regard to self-worth, depression, self-
harm, suicidal ideations, and emotional dysregulation. Both shy and avoidant individu-
als also reported lower quality relationships with best friends, romantic partners,
mothers, and fathers compared to the those individuals in the control group. Of note,
avoidant individuals reported the lowest levels of social comparisons and did not differ
from the unsociable and control groups in fear of negative evaluations. Taken together,
the findings point to both shyness and avoidance as being significant risk factors for
internalizing problems and poor relationships.
Although results of the current study add to a growing body of work suggesting
shyness in emerging adulthood is maladaptive by finding that shy individuals struggle
with internalizing problems and relationships with peers and parents, the more novel
contributions of the study may stem from the findings regarding avoidance. Specifi-
cally, the study provides one of the first attempts to examine avoidance in emerging
adulthood; and the findings suggest that like shy individuals, avoidant individuals
appear to be struggling in several important areas for emerging adults. It is important
to note, however, that the results support the notion that there are subtle but important
distinctions between shyness and avoidance as forms of withdrawal. For example, it
appears that the shy individuals who still want to interact are taxed with significant
concerns about what others think of them (i.e., fear of negative evaluations, heightened
social comparisons) whereas in choosing to simply stay clear of others, avoidant
individuals appear to worry less about those things.
These distinctions underscore the conceptual and empirical differences between the
groups. Conceptually, Asendorpf (1990) suggested that shy individuals want to interact
(high-approach motivation) but experience fear and wariness in doing so (high-
avoidance motivation). Avoidance on the other hand appears to stem from individuals
both desiring solitude and actively seeking to avoid social interaction. However,
presently, there are a number of thoughts on whether or not this is the correct concep-
tualization of the motivation behind avoidance, and, if it is, why this is the case. For
example, Asendorpf and others (e.g., Schmidt & Fox, 1999) have speculated that this
intense desire to avoid social interaction stems from such extreme fear and anxiety
during social situations that, over time, the desire to approach is eventually extin-
guished. Others have proposed the possibility that it might be an early consequence of
the development of depression (e.g., Coplan & Armer, 2007) or the result of extended
exposure to peer exclusion (e.g., Bowker & Raja, 2011). Most recently, avoidance in
later childhood was conceptualized as the combination of high shyness and low
sociability (Coplan et al., in press). In sum, there is emerging conceptual and empirical
evidence suggesting that avoidance is indeed a unique form of solitude that, for
potentially varying reasons, may reflect a heightened desire to seek solitude.
It is important to note that the majority of these findings applied regardless of
gender. Though the lack of gender differences may be due to the disproportionate
number of women to men in the study, it may very well suggest that the negative effects
of shyness and avoidance during emerging adulthood apply to both men and women.
This is worth noting because there is evidence that shyness may be more detrimental
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social Development, 22, 3, 2013
 Social Withdrawal in Emerging Adulthood 535
for men making the transition to adulthood than for women (e.g., Caspi et al., 1988;
Kerr et al., 1996). However, as noted previously, most of the longitudinal research are
decades old and may not capture the changes that have occurred for women in Western
societies today. Shy women may be experiencing difficulties similar to shy men
because emerging adulthood today is characterized by delayed marriage and parenting
resulting in a period of enhanced exploration for both men and women (Arnett, 2004)
thereby requiring just as much assertiveness, independence, and social interaction as
men. Indeed, results of this study provide evidence that shyness is a stumbling block for
both men and women as they make their way through the important aspects of
emerging adulthood.

Unsociability
The findings regarding unsociability also make interesting contributions. Based on
studies in childhood and adolescence, it has been suggested that unsociability may be
much more ‘benign’ (see Coplan & Weeks, 2010, for a review) than shyness and
avoidance. Though that might be the case relative to shyness and avoidance, we
hypothesized that unsociability would not be without its developmental challenges
when compared to a control group. Surprisingly, there were very few differences
between the unsociable and comparison groups. Indeed, the unsociable individuals
reported greater levels of depression than the comparison group but otherwise did not
differ from the control group on any other indicator of internalizing or relationship
problems. Indeed, ‘benign’ seems to be an apt description for this behavior. In saying
this though, the one difference that was found should not completely be dismissed.
Specifically, the unsociable group was found to have greater levels of depression than
the comparison group. Given the importance of one’s well-being, higher levels of
depressions should not be overlooked. Future work should examine why individuals
who seem to be doing well in so many areas (or at least not differing from average
emerging adults) would report higher levels in this important indicator of well-being.
It would also be important to investigate how these individuals navigate their personal
relationships when they do not have a strong need to be with other people. For example,
it may be that unsociable individuals have lower expectations for their relationships.
Or, it may be that they form relationships with individuals who likewise are not
interested in social settings, and therefore as a pair (i.e., friends, romantic partners),
they withdraw from social settings. Again, much more work is needed to understand
better the trajectory of unsociable individuals through emerging adulthood and into
adulthood because in general, it does not appear that being unsociable carries the same
risk for internalizing problems and relationships that shyness and avoidance do.

Summary
Taken together, the findings suggest that shyness and avoidance appear to pose serious
threats to well-being in emerging adulthood. In becoming more autonomous and
self-reliant, emerging adults are required to take on greater responsibility in acting for
themselves with many important tasks and contexts requiring social interactions (e.g.,
dating, hanging out in groups, work environments, apartments/dorms, classrooms, and
possible religious or volunteer organizations). Socializing in such settings may seem
daunting to avoidant and shy individuals leaving them faced with options that include
either avoiding them and thereby the growth that can come from them, or participating
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social Development, 22, 3, 2013
536 Larry J. Nelson
in them but simultaneously experiencing the negative effects of the accompanying fear
and anxiety. Both options may have negative consequences attached to them and might
become increasingly problematic over time.

Limitations
Despite the contributions of this study, it is not without its limitations. Firstly, much of
the discussion section has speculated that shyness is the causal factor that leads to
internalizing and relationship problems. However, the cross-sectional and correlational
nature of the data prevents definitive conclusions regarding causality being made.
Another limitation of the study is that participants include only college students. Future
work needs to include participants who are not attending a four-year college or
university. Thirdly, most of the items that tapped avoidance were sociability items that
were then reverse scored. It might be argued that they do not directly assess a high-
avoidance and low-approach motivation. Although the factor was labeled ‘avoidant’,
and reverse-coded items were employed, the construct was measured by items that
reflected more than just a disinterest in social settings (e.g., the unsociable item ‘I don’t
really mind spending time alone’) but instead a strong preference to avoid (e.g., ‘I don’t
really like being with other people and prefer being alone’) and a low need to approach
(e.g., ‘I like to be with people’ reversed scored). In sum, the items still appear to
capture low approach and high avoidance but it may be important for future work to
assess directly more avoidance with non-reversed-scored items tapping high avoidance
and low approach. Indeed, considerable work is still needed in order to establish a clear
conceptual understanding of this construct, and in the development of appropriate
measurement tools.
Next, the ‘meaning’ of the various forms of social withdrawal may differ based on
culture. Indeed, there may be some group-oriented cultures in which withdrawing from
the group for whatever reason might lead to negative feedback and disapproval and,
subsequently, negative outcomes. Therefore, future work should include greater ethnic
diversity to explore these findings in various cultures within the USA, as well as in
other countries.
Finally, there is an extensive body of personality research focused on the traits of
introversion and neuroticism. Future work should examine how social motivations, in
general, and findings from the present study, in specific, might ‘map on’ to (or be
distinct from) these personality traits. For example, Hills and Argyle (2001) identified
a group of happy introverts who may be similar to the unsociable construct identified
in the present study. Future work should explore for possible overlap in the constructs
being examined in the developmental literature (e.g., social withdrawal) and the per-
sonality literature (e.g., introversion, solitropic orientation).

Conclusion
Despite these limitations, the study makes several significant contributions. Firstly,
subtypes of withdrawal based on approach–avoidance motivations were identified as
unique and distinct constructs in emerging adulthood. Secondly, whereas emerging
work in earlier stages of life (e.g., adolescence, Bowker & Raja, 2011) have started to
demonstrate that avoidance and shyness may be risk factors in development, the results
of the present study extend those findings into emerging adulthood. Indeed, the find-
ings reveal that both shyness and avoidance appear to be related to significant problems
in regard to internalizing issues and relationships with peers and parents.
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social Development, 22, 3, 2013
 Social Withdrawal in Emerging Adulthood 537

References
Arnett, J. J. (2004). Emerging adulthood: The winding road from the late teens through the
twenties. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Aron, A., Aron, E. N., & Smollan, D. (1992). Inclusion of other in the self scale and the structure
of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 596–612.
Asendorpf, J. B. (1990). Beyond social withdrawal: Shyness, unsociability, and peer avoidance.
Human Development, 33, 250–259.
Asendorpf, J. B. (1993). Beyond temperament: A two-factor coping model of the development
of inhibition during childhood. In K. H. Rubin, & J. Asendorpf (Eds.), Social withdrawal,
inhibition, and shyness in childhood (pp. 265–290). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Asendorpf, J. B., Denissen, J. J. A., & van Aken, M. A. G. (2008). Inhibited and aggressive
preschool children at 23 years of age: Personality and social transitions into adulthood.
Developmental Psychology, 44, 997–1011.
Bowker, J. C., & Raja, R. (2011). Social withdrawal subtypes during early adolescence in India.
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 39, 201–212. doi: 10.1007/s10802-010-9461-7
Carbery, J., & Buhrmester, D. (1998). Friendship and need fulfillment during three phases of
young adulthood. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15, 393–409.
Caspi, A. (2000). The child is father of the man: Personality continuities from childhood to
adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 158–172.
Caspi, A., Elder, G. H., & Bem, D. J. (1988). Moving away from the world: Life-course patterns
of shy children. Developmental Psychology, 24, 824–831.
Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral
Research, 1, 245–276.
Cheek, J. M., & Buss, A. H. (1981). Shyness and sociability. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 41, 330–339.
Coplan, R. J., & Armer, M. (2007). A ‘multitude’ of solitude: A closer look social withdrawal
and nonsocial play in early childhood. Child Development Perspectives, 1, 26–32.
Coplan, R. J., Prakash, K., O’Neil, K., & Armer, M. (2004). Do you ‘want’ to play? Distin-
guishing between conflicted-shyness and social disinterest in early childhood. Development
Psychology, 40, 244–258.
Coplan, R., Rose-Krasnor, L., Weeks, M., Kingsbury, A., Kingsbury, M., & Bullock, A. (in
press). Alone is a crowd: Social motivations, social withdrawal, and socio-emotional func-
tioning in later childhood. Developmental Psychology.
Coplan, R. J., & Rubin, K. H. (2010). Social withdrawal and shyness in childhood: History,
theories, definitions, and assessments. In R. J. Coplan, & K. H. Rubin (Eds.), The development
of shyness and social withdrawal (pp. 3–22). New York: Guilford Press.
Coplan, R. J., & Weeks, M. (2010). Unsociability in middle childhood: Conceptualization,
assessment, and associations with socio-emotional functioning. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly,
56, 105–130.
Eysenck, H. J. (1947). Dimensions of personality. London, UK: Kegan Paul.
Eysenck, H. J. (1956). The questionnaire measurement of neuroticism and extraversion. Rivista
de Psicologia, 50, 113–140.
Gray, J. A. (1972). The psychophysiological nature of introversion-extraversion: A modification
of Eysenck’s Theory. In V. D. Nebylitsyn, & J. A. Gray (Eds.), Biological bases of individual
behaviour (pp. 182–205). New York and London: Academic Press.
Hills, P., & Argyle, M. (2001). Happiness, introversion-extraversion and happy introverts.
Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 595–608.
Kagan, J., & Moss, B. A. (1962). Birth to maturity. New York: Wiley.
Kerr, M., Lambert, W. W., & Bem, D. J. (1996). Life course sequelae of childhood shyness in
Sweden: Comparison with the United States. Developmental Psychology, 32, 1100–1105.
Kim, J., Rapee, R., Oh, K., & Moon, H. (2008). Retrospective report of social withdrawal during
adolescence and current maladjustment in young adulthood: Cross-cultural comparisons
between Australian and South Korean students. Journal of Adolescence, 31, 543–563.
Leary, M. R. (1983). A brief version of the fear of negative evaluation scale. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 9, 371–375.
Melchior, L. A., & Cheek, J. M. (1990). Shyness and anxious self preoccupation during a social
interaction. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 5, 117–130.

© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social Development, 22, 3, 2013
538 Larry J. Nelson
Mounts, N., Valentiner, D., Anderson, K., & Boswell, M. (2006). Shyness, sociability, and
parental support for the college transition: Relation to adolescents’ adjustment. Journal of
Youth and Adolescence, 35, 68–77.
Neeman, J., & Harter, S. (1986). Manual for the self-perception profile for college students.
Unpublished manuscript, University of Denver, Denver, Colorado.
Nelson, L. J., Padilla-Walker, L. M., Badger, S., Barry, C. M., Carroll, J. S., & Madsen, S. D.
(2008). Associations between shyness and internalizing behaviors, externalizing behaviors,
and relationships during emerging adulthood. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 37, 605–615.
Novak, S. P., & Clayton, R. R. (2001). The influence of school environment and self-regulation
on transitions between stages of cigarette smoking: A multilevel analysis. Health Psychology,
20, 196–207.
Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self report depression scale for research in the
general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385–401.
Schmidt, L. A., & Fox, N. A. (1999). Conceptual, biological, and behavioral distinctions among
different categories of shy children. In L. A. Schmidt, & J. Schulkin (Eds.), Extreme fear,
shyness, and social phobia: Origins, biological mechanisms, and clinical outcomes
(pp. 47–66). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Acknowledgments
The author expresses appreciation to the instructors and students at all Project R.E.A.D.Y. data
collection sites for their assistance. I am grateful to Laura Padilla-Walker for her feedback on
drafts of this manuscript. I am also grateful for the grant support of the Family Studies Center
at Brigham Young University.

© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social Development, 22, 3, 2013