Social-evaluative anxiety was initially defined as the experience of

distress, discomfort, fear, anxiety, etc., in social situations; as

the deliberate avoidance of social situations;
scale
It was decided in the construction of the present scales to exclude
items asking about physiological signs or impaired performance. This
would make clear what behavior was used as a sign for membership in
the class "anxious"—subjective distress and avoidance—and what
behavior was considered a correlate of class membership—impaired
performance and physiological signs
To control for acquiescence response set in a true-false format, as
was done here, one must have approximately half of the items worded
so that answering "false" indicates presence of the trait, which
requires an adequate definition of the opposite instance
The SAD scale was divided into two subscales, social avoidance and
social distress. The purpose was to create a general scale, so the
respondent was not asked why he experienced distress or avoided
social encounters. Social avoidance was defined as avoiding being
with, talking to, or escaping from others for any reason. Both actual
avoidance and the desire for avoidance were included. The opposite
instance was simple lack of an avoidance motive, not desire to
affiliate. Social distress was defined as the reported experience of
a negative emotion, such as being upset, distressed, tense, or
anxious, in social interactions, or the reported lack of negative
emotion, such as being relaxed, calm, at ease, or comfortable. The
opposite instance of distress was lack of unhappiness, not the
presence of some positive emotion.

Scale ( Crowne- Marlowe Social Desirability Scale and Jackson’s first 10 items of Infrequency
scales)
The 145 items initially selected were administered to 297
undergraduates at the Uni
The Crowne-Marlowe (1964) Social Desirability scale and the first 10
items of Jackson's (1966b) Infrequency scale were also administered.
The latter was used to control for pseudorandom responding, and 5s
who answered any of these items incorrectly were dropped from all
analyses. Ninety-two 5s were dropped for this reason or because they
did not answer all items

The Crowne-Marlowe scale provided an initial empirical criterion

against which to evaluate the SAD and FNE items. Jackson's (1966a,
1967) item selection procedure was employed, to minimize covariation
with social desirability as a response style. For every item for 205
5s a computer calculated the biserial correlation of the item with
its own scale and the biserial correlation with all other scales in
the sample. Giiving an estimate of the amount of correlation between
an item and its own scale with social desirability variance removed.

Validity
The Crowne-Marlowe scale provided an initial empirical criterion
against which to evaluate the SAD and FNE items.
Reliability
Differential Reliability Index (DRI) was calculated for each
remaining item. In the first instance, the DRI was calculated for the
item's own scale and the CrowneMarlowe, giving an estimate of the
amount of correlation between an item and its own scale with social
desirability variance removed. The first criterion for selecting
items was that this DRI be as high as possible and in all cases above
.50.

Item Analysis ( Rational Analysis? rational analysis provided a large

number of items which passed this first hurdle
§§ n

What’s the scalling method

To
control
for
acquiescence
response
set in a
true-false format,
as was
done
here,
one
must have approximately half
of
the
items worded
so
that
answering
"false"
indicates
presence
of the
trait,
which requires
an
adequate
definition
of the
opposite
in-
stance.
For
example,
the
opposite instance
of
social avoidance
is not
necessarily social
approach,
that
is,
affiliation,
but
simply
a
lack
of
avoidance.
If the
opposite instance
of
avoidance
were
allowed
to be
affiliation
it
would
have obscured
any
possible discrimi-
nant relationship between
the SAD
scale
and
measures
of
affiliation.
Particular attention
was
paid
to
wording items
so
that
the op-
posite instance
of a
trait
simply indicated
absence
of
that trait,
not the
presence
of
some
other
trait.

The Social Avoidance and Distress Scale (SADS) uses a questionnaire

including 28 true/false items. This instrument was developed to
quantify social anxiety. Two aspects of anxiety are measured: Four
experiences – distress, discomfort, fear, anxiety – and the
avoidance of social situations. The SAD scale is closely linked with
the Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale (FNE) in dealing with social
anxiety. Each use social situations in the questioning

 Social Avoidance and Distress Scale (SADS) measures and quantify

aspects of social anxiety, including distress, discomfort, fear and avoidance of social situation.

The SAD scale was divided into two subscales, social avoidance and
social distress. The purpose was to create a general scale, so the
respondent was not asked why he experienced distress or avoided
social encounters.
Social avoidance is defined as the desire to escape or actually
avoiding being with, talking to, or interacting with others for
any reason. Both actual avoidance and the desire for avoidance were
included. The opposite instance was simple lack of an avoidance
motive, not desire to affiliate. Social distress was defined as the
reported experience of a negative emotion, such as being upset,
distressed, tense, or anxious, in social interactions, or the
reported lack of negative emotion, such as being relaxed, calm, at
ease, or comfortable. The opposite instance of distress was lack of
unhappiness, not the presence of some positive emotion.The SAD scale
is closely linked with the Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale (FNE) in
dealing with social anxiety. Each use social situations in the
questioning

The two
scales were constructed
at the
same
time. Three general goals
were
adopted:
to
suppress
response style errors,
to
foster
scale
homogeneity,
and to
foster
discriminant
or
convergent relationships with certain other
scales.

The SADS was created simultaneously with the FNE by and was designed to include the authors'
theoretical viewpoint of two of the three components of social anxiety: the experience of
discomfort and the purposeful avoidance of social situations. The measure does not include
physiological indicators of anxiety or performance issues. It was develop by David Watson and
Ronald Friend. The Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale (FNE), created by the same authors as the
Social Avoidance and Distress Scale in 1969, is closely related to both measures.

Following the stringent criteria for evaluation of items suggested 145 items were selected by
rational analysis from a much larger pool. The 145 items initially selected were administered to
297 undergraduates at the University of Toronto. The Crowne-Marlowe (1964) Social Desirability
scale and the first 10 items of Jackson's (1966b) Infrequency scale were also administered. The
latter was used to control for pseudorandom responding, and 5s who answered any of these
items in- correctly were dropped from all analyses. Ninety-two 5s were dropped for this reason or
because they did not answer all items.