(PS2-A24) Self-concept Clarity Mediates the Relationship Between Emotion Differentiation and Social Anxiety

Current models of social anxiety all posit some role of the self in maintaining the disorder. Self-concept clarity represents a less-studied aspect of the self that refers to the extent to which self-beliefs are clearly defined, internally consistent, and stable. It has been found to predict social anxiety even after controlling for depression, general anxiety, stress, and self-esteem. However, the role of self-concept clarity in the onset and maintenance of social anxiety remains unclear. We propose that clarity about one’s sense of self requires an ability to differentiate one’s emotional states. Differentiation of one’s emotions allows for a more granular understanding of one’s motivations and for the ways in which one reconciles the demands and expectations of others with one’s own needs and goals. Based on these ideas, as well as the fact that emotion differentiation is negatively associated with social anxiety, the current study examines whether the relationship of emotion differentiation with social anxiety may, in part, operate through self-concept clarity.

Participants were 432 undergraduates ages 18-31 (Mage = 18.83, SD = 1.55) at a large midwestern university. Measures included in this study were the 6-item Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS), 12-item Self-Concept Clarity Scale (SCCS), 10-item Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES), 20-item Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CESD), and the first two scales of the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (Difficulty Identifying Feelings and Difficulty Describing Feelings; TAS-DIF and TAS-DDF). Given that the factor structures of the SCCS and TAS have not been consistently replicated in the literature, confirmatory factor analyses were conducted in R using robust maximum likelihood estimation to verify the factor structures of the TAS and the SCCS. As expected, a 2-factor solution fit the TAS data well, CFI = 0.946, TLI = 0.933, RMSEA = 0.077, SRMR = 0.038. Furthermore, the 2-factor solution fit the TAS data significantly better than a 1-factor solution, Δχ2(1) = 14.33, p < .001. Regarding the SCCS, the hypothesized 1-factor structure was an adequate fit, CFI = 0.937, TLI = 0.922, RMSEA = 0.083, SRMR = 0.045.

Hayes’ Process MACRO for R (model 4) was used to test the hypothesis that self-concept clarity would mediate the relationship between the two TAS scales and social anxiety. A significant indirect effect of the TAS-DIF through self-concept clarity on social anxiety was found, ab = 0.1232, 95% C.I. (0.0720, 0.1845), whereas the direct effect of the TAS-DIF was not significant. A significant indirect effect of the TAS-DDF through self-concept clarity on social anxiety was likewise found, ab = 0.0970, 95% C.I. (0.0498, 0.1541), with a significant direct effect of the TAS-DDF on social anxiety, c’ = 0.3389, 95% C.I. (0.2023, 0.4755).

These results demonstrate the plausibility of the proposed mediation model. The pattern of significance was unchanged after controlling for self-esteem and depression, demonstrating the specificity of the model to social anxiety.