Assessment and Implications of Social Avoidance in Chinese Early Adolescents

Abstract

The goals of the present study were to (a) develop and validate a new self-report measure of social avoidance for use among early adolescents in mainland China and (b) explore the links between subtypes of social withdrawal (i.e., shyness, unsociability, and social avoidance) and indices of socio-emotional difficulties in this cultural context. Participants were 663 early adolescents (350 boys, 313 girls) attending elementary schools ([Formula: see text] = 10.25 years) and middle schools ([Formula: see text] = 12.53 years) in Shanghai, People’s Republic of China. Measures of social withdrawal subtypes and adjustment were collected using multi-source assessments, including self-reports, peer nominations, and teacher ratings. The results provided evidence in support of the reliability and validity of the new scale of self-reported social avoidance. Shyness, unsociability, and social avoidance were also all uniquely associated with emotion dysregulation and self-reported internalizing problems. However, only social avoidance was uniquely associated with teacher-rated emotion symptoms and peer problems (as rated by both peers and teachers). Results are discussed in terms of the reasons why social avoidance may have particularly negative implications for early adolescents in China.

Assessment and implications of social withdrawal in early childhood: A first look at social avoidance

“…Results provide initial support for the notion that social avoidance is a particularly maladaptive form of social withdrawal. For example, socially avoidant older children reported higher social anxiety than unsociable and non‐withdrawn children (Coplan et al, ), and social avoidance in Chinese children was uniquely associated with indices of both peer and internalizing problems (Sang et al, ). Socially avoidant young adults also reported more emotional dysregulation and relationship difficulties than did unsociable or non‐withdrawn individuals (but did not differ significantly from their shy counterparts) (Nelson, ).…”

Unsociability in Chinese adolescents: Cross‐informant agreement and relations with social and school adjustment

“…However, a factor that may have been confounded with cultural context is the informant of unsociability. Beyond early childhood, studies of unsociability in Western cultures have often used self‐report whereas studies in China have predominately relied on peers’ report until recent years (e.g., Coplan et al, ; Liu, Zhou, Li, & Chen, ; Sang et al, ). However, cross‐informants’ (self vs. peer) agreement on unsociability still rarely has been examined, especially in China.…”

“…The items capture a combination of an overt preference for solitude (rather play alone than with others), a lack of social interest (not interested in group activities), and also a dislike of social interactions (‘does not prefer social interactions’ and ‘would not like to talk with others’; e.g., Chen et al, ; Ding et al, ; Liu et al, ). Despite the historical reliance on peer nominations in social withdrawal research in China, self‐reported unsociability has emerged in recent years and been increasingly used (e.g., Coplan et al, ; Liu, Zhou, et al, ; Sang et al, ). In these studies, unsociability assessed with the adapted Child Social Preference Questionnaire (Coplan et al, ) demonstrated good internal consistency.…”

“…In recent studies in which unsociability (a.k.a. ‘preference for solitude’) was self‐reported (Coplan et al, ; Liu, Zhou, et al, ; Sang et al, ; Wang, ; Zhou & Liu, ), unsociability was significantly, but weakly‐to‐moderately, correlated with peer problems, internalizing problems (loneliness, self‐worth, depression, social anxiety), and school/academic problems (shyness was not controlled). Using a person‐centered approach, Coplan et al () reported that unsociable children (high on unsociability and low on shyness) did not differ from shy children (high on shyness and low on unsociability) in these indices, except for social anxiety for which shy children scored higher.…”

“…Using a person‐centered approach, Coplan et al () reported that unsociable children (high on unsociability and low on shyness) did not differ from shy children (high on shyness and low on unsociability) in these indices, except for social anxiety for which shy children scored higher. However, Sang et al () found that controlling for shyness and social avoidance, unsociability was still related to lower emotion regulation and more internalizing problems (although the strengths of the relations seem weaker than those for shyness or social avoidance), but no longer related to peer problems. It should be noted that in studies unsociability was co‐examined with shyness and/or social avoidance, self‐reported unsociability has showed a moderate, positive correlation with self‐reported shyness and a moderate‐to‐high, positive correlation with self‐reported social avoidance (Coplan et al, ; Sang et al, ).…”