The interactional model of anxiety: An evaluation of the differential hypothesis.

Abstract

The interactional model of anxiety states that individuals who score high on trait anxiety measure for a specific situation dimension will respond with elevated state anxiety only in reaction to encounters with congruent situations. We tested this model by presenting subjects who scored high or low on ego threat, physical danger, novelty ambiguity, and daily routine trait measures with stressors representative of the four situation dimensions. The interactional model was partially supported for ego threat trait anxiety. However, results generally supported the influence of situation rather than the trait or interaction on anxiety response. The lack of trait factor independence for the novelty ambiguity and daily routine trait dimensions is discussed as a potential reason for the nonsupport of the interactional model. Finally, we suggest that the experimental design used in this study is a more accurate and vigorous test of the differential hypothesis than past research.

Choking Under Social Pressure

“…Finally, participants completed a questionnaire including measures of anxiety, motivation, performance expectations and estimates, and demographics. Borrowed from Mothersill, Dobson, and Neufeld (1986), the anxiety measure consisted of six items assessing participants’ negative feelings and physiological responses. 1 Specifically, participants were prompted to consider how they were feeling when completing the Eyes Task and anagram task and respond to the items “I had an uneasy feeling,” “I felt tense,” “I felt anxious,” “My heart beat faster,” “I had a fluttering feeling in my stomach,” and “I was perspiring” using response options ranging from 1 ( not at all true ) to 5 ( extremely true ).…”

“… 1. We also included three items pertaining to heightened arousal from Mothersill, Dobson, and Neufeld (1986): “I enjoyed the situation,” “I felt exhilarated and thrilled,” and “I seek experiences like this.” Because we were only interested in participants’ negative experience of anxiety and arousal, we did not include those items in our index of anxiety. …”

A formal analysis of stressor and stress‐proneness effects on simple information processing

“…Included in this past work specifically has been the stressor of physical danger/discomfort and vulnerability to its effects (Lefave & Neufeld, 1980;Mothersill, Pobson & Neufeld, 1986). Along with 'interpersonal ego threat', physical danger/discomfort reliably has been found to be a salient and semi-independent dimension of stress and stress proneness (Endler et al, 1983;Eysenck, 1989;Mothersill et al, 1986). Provision was made here for categorical group formation, on what may be viewed as a continuous individualdifference variable, by ascertaining homogeneity of response patterns within each of the four groups-condition combinations.…”

Personality and social psychology: towards a synthesis

“…In addition to the clear-cut effects obtained for physical danger situations, the social evaluation dimensions appears to be a particularly powerful component of A-trait. Support for the interpersonal and ambiguous facets of A-trait has been far less conclusive, suggesting that the present version of the interaction model of anxiety may have to be revised in the light of these recent findings (see also Mothersill et al, 1986).…”