Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 2020, 61, 819–826 DOI: 10.1111/sjop.

12673

Personality and Social Psychology

Measuring associations between social anxiety and use of different types
of social media using the Swedish Social Anxiety Scale for Social Media
Users: A psychometric evaluation and cross-sectional study
OLIVIA J. ERLIKSSON1 PHILIP LINDNER1,2 €
and EWA MORTBERG1

1
Department of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
2
Centre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, & Stockholm Health Care Services, Region Stockholm,
Stockholm, Sweden

Erliksson, O. J., Lindner, P. & M€ortberg, E. (2020). Measuring associations between social anxiety and use of different types of social media using the
Swedish Social Anxiety Scale for Social Media Users: A psychometric evaluation and cross-sectional study. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 61,
819–826.

Research on the association between social anxiety and social media usage remains inconclusive: despite the preference for computer-mediated
communication there is currently no clear empirical support for social anxiety being associated with longer duration of social media use. Self-report
measures for social anxiety that are adapted for the context of social media could facilitate further research. The current study aimed to develop a Swedish
version of the recently developed Social Anxiety Scale for Social Media Users (SAS-SMU), evaluate its psychometric properties, and explore associations
between different uses of social media and social anxiety. Three factors were retained for SAS-SMU with excellent internal consistency. SAS-SMU
evidenced convergent validity with measures of social anxiety, negative convergent validity with satisfaction with life, and divergent validity with
measures of obsessive-compulsive disorder, depression and generalized anxiety disorder. Results indicated that higher levels of social anxiety were
associated with passive and active use as well as longer duration of social media use in general, which is at odds with a previous study where passive use
remained the only significant predictor for social anxiety.
Key words: Social anxiety, social media use, social networking sites, scale validation, scale development, passive social media use.
Olivia J. Erliksson, Department of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden. E-mail: olivia.erliksson@gmail.com

BACKGROUND analysis confirm a preference for computer-mediated

Social media is a common part of modern social life, yet is not
easily defined since concepts, design and usage are readily
changing with new technology and shifting user habits (Obar &
Wildman, 2015). Nonetheless, all social media share common
core elements: (1) the social media user is both a creator and
consumer of content, sharing their own content and reacting on
others’ by commenting, sharing or “liking;” (2) the user profile is
essential for creating and gaining access to content; and (3) social
media provides the possibility of establishing social networks
such as “friends” (e.g., Facebook) or “followers” (e.g., Twitter)
(Obar & Wildman, 2015). Traditional internet forums and chat
applications do not aim to facilitate social networks and are
therefore not considered to be social media, although they are
sometimes extensions of them (e.g., Facebook Messenger) and
have similar features (e.g., liking posts and following specific
forum users). Internet and social media interactions also share
common features: for instance, communication is seldom carried
out in real time or face-to-face.
Social anxiety disorder (SAD) or social phobia (American
Psychiatric Association, 2013) is common among anxiety
disorders, with a point prevalence of 15.6% in Sweden (Furmark,
1999). Fear of being criticized or negatively evaluated is the core
characteristic, leading to avoidance of social situations which in
turn impacts daily functioning (American Psychiatric Association,
2013). For individuals with SAD, modern social media may serve
as an alternative venue for social interaction that is less
distressing, although they may ultimately maintain catastrophic
beliefs and functional impairments. Results of a recent meta-
communication over communication face-to-face among socially
anxious individuals (Prizant-Passal, Shechner, & Aderka, 2016).
Higher social anxiety appears associated with perceiving internet
interactions as less risky when it comes to being negatively
evaluated (Lee & Stapinski, 2012), entailing that social media
may provide a context where social anxiety is more easily
controlled, since symptoms of anxiety such as blushing or
shaking will not show (Prizant-Passal et al., 2016). Safety
behaviors, that is, behaviors that are used in order to avoid an
expected social catastrophe, could therefore be seen as being
automatically employed while interacting on social media. Social
media specific safety behaviors such as removing tags of oneself
from photos or monitoring others’ responses to one’s posts also
seem to be used more frequently by individuals with higher social
anxiety (Carruthers, Warnock-Parkes, & Clark, 2019). At the
same time, higher social anxiety has been associated with more
frequent self-disclosures when communicating over the internet
compared to face-to-face (Weidman, Fernandez, Levinson,
Augustine, Larsen, & Rodebaugh, 2012), as well as having more
information on Facebook profiles (such as interests) compared to
others (Fernandez, Levinson, & Rodebaugh, 2012), strengthening
the hypothesis that computer-mediated communication is
perceived as less anxiety-provoking than face-to-face interactions.
The preference for computer-mediated communication would
suggest that socially anxious individuals spend more time on the
internet or social media compared to others. The empirical
support for this hypothesis is however mixed and inconclusive
(Prizant-Passal et al., 2016). A recent review states that there is

© 2020 The Authors. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology published by Scandinavian Psychological Associations and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and
distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
820 O. J. Erliksson et al.
no clear association between time spent on social media and
social anxiety (Seabrook, Kern, & Rickard, 2016). However, for
the reasons discussed above, overall time spent on social media
might be too unspecific as a measure. More detailed
measurements are needed in order to better understand social
media usage among individuals with social anxiety. Measuring
passive and active use of social media seems promising in that
regard. Passive use is characterized by consuming content without
social interaction, whereas active use involves creating content
and interacting with others (Frison & Eggermont, 2016). Indeed, a
recent study found that higher social anxiety was associated with
passive use of Facebook and remained the only significant
predictor when entered together with content production and
interactive communication in a regression model (Shaw, Timpano,
Tran, & Joormann, 2015). There is no agreement in the extant
literature on what is defined as active social media use, with some
studies finding two separate factors for active use public and
private (Frison & Eggermont, 2015, 2016), while others find only
one factor (i.e. active use) (Thorisdottir, Sigurvinsdottir,
Asgeirsdottir, Allegrante, & Sigfusdottir, 2019). Public active use
such as commenting on friends’ posts offers less control of
privacy (e.g., visibility and recipients) compared to private active
use such as chatting using Facebook Messenger (Green,
Wilhelmsen, Wilmots, Dodd, & Quinn, 2016). However, the
division of active use is complicated since privacy settings can
vary from user to user (Green et al., 2016) and also depends on
what social media platform is being used. Although the internet
and social media might be less anxiety provoking than face-to-
face interactions, the quality of relationships, for example,
reciprocity and openness, has been reported to be low for socially
anxious individuals regardless of relationships being online or
face-to-face (Lee & Stapinski, 2012). At the same time, social
support derived from Facebook has been shown to contribute to
subjective well-being more so than social support face-to-face,
and Facebook could therefore play an important role for
individuals with social anxiety (Indian & Grieve, 2014).
In sum, the association between social anxiety and social media
use is complex and needs to be explored further. A better
understanding of the role of social media use and its association
with social anxiety could inform treatment models to
accommodate this aspect of modern life, for example, by creating
exposure exercises involving social media usage. The Social
Anxiety Scale for Social Media Users (SAS-SMU) (Alkis,
Kadirhan, & Sat, 2017) is a recently developed self-report
measure of social anxiety in the context of social media use and
could facilitate further research. The original SAS-SMU is in
Turkish and has since then been translated into an English version
(Alkis et al., 2017), which has been employed in several studies
(Aluh, Chukwuobasi, & Mosanya, 2019; Farrell, 2019; Ruggieri,
Santoro, Pace, Passanisi, & Schimmenti, 2020). However, only its
Turkish version has been validated previously (Alkis et al., 2017).
Cross-culturally validated scales are needed since cultural factors
can influence the manifestation of social anxiety (Spence &
Rapee, 2016).
The current study describes the development of a Swedish
version of the SAS-SMU and the psychometric evaluation
thereof, including examining underlying dimensions, internal
consistency as well as convergent and divergent validity in a
© 2020 The Authors. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology published by Scandinavian Psychological Associations and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Scand J Psychol 61 (2020)
Swedish population. We also explore in-depth associations
between different types of social media use (passive and active)
and social anxiety.
METHODS
Sample and procedure
Participants were active social media users, 18 years or older, primarily
recruited through convenience sampling in conjunction with lectures at
Stockholm University in 2019. Additional participants were recruited
through email distribution at other universities in Sweden, and through
social media posts. All data collection was done using an online survey. In
the survey, participants were first presented with study information and
provided digital informed consent. Participants were then asked to state
age and gender, after which a social media usage form was presented,
followed by the remaining self-report scales (see Measures). All items
were mandatory.
The final sample consisted of 333 participants, of whom 237 identified
as women (71.2%), 84 as men (25.2%) and 12 as unspecified gender
(3.6%), with an average age of 29 years (median = 26, SD = 9.89).
Measures
The Social Anxiety Scale for Social Media Users (SAS-SMU). The
SAS-SMU is a self-report questionnaire developed by Alkis et al. (2017)
with 21 items covering four dimensions of social anxiety in connection to
social media usage, for example, “I am concerned about being ridiculed
by others for the content I have shared.” Items are rated on a five-point
(scored 1–5) frequency-based response format “never” to “always.”
Permission to use, translate and publish the SAS-SMU was obtained from
the original authors by e-mail.
The dimension “shared content anxiety” (SCA) includes seven items
relating to anxiety from having shared or created content on social media.
The second dimension “privacy concern anxiety” (PCA) consists of five
items relating to personal information and the possibility of such
information to be shared on social media. The third dimension “interaction
anxiety” (IA) includes six items relating to anxiety resulting from social
interaction over social media. The last dimension “self-evaluation anxiety”
(SEA) comprises three items concerning anxiety from negative self-
evaluations. Alkis et al. (2017) reported high internal consistency with
Cronbach’s alpha for all dimensions; 0.92 for SCA, 0.84 for PCA, 0.88
for IA, and 0.80 for SEA.
The English SAS-SMU was translated into Swedish by the authors.
Items were then examined by an independent bilingual (Swedish/Turkish)
psychology researcher to ensure preservation of the original wording since
the SAS-SMU is originally in Turkish, upon which minor adjustments
were made. The preliminary Swedish translation was then back-translated
to English by another independent bilingual (Swedish/English) psychology
researcher. Differences between the two versions were examined, and
adjustments were made when meanings of words differed. Synonyms were
deemed acceptable and therefore remained unchanged, for instance: “I feel
ill at ease” (backwards translation) and “I feel uneasy” (official English
translation).
The Social Phobia Inventory (SPIN). In order to evaluate convergent
validity SPIN was employed (Connor, Davidson, Churchill, Sherwood,
Weisler, & Foa, 2000), (Swedish translation; Svanborg, Hedman &
M€ortberg, 2016). SPIN is a self-report scale containing 17 items that
measure symptoms of social anxiety, for example: “Being embarrassed or
looking stupid are among my worst fears.” The questions are answered on
a five-step Likert scale. A cut-off score of 19 and above is recommended
for distinguishing social anxiety disorder (Connor et al., 2000), however,
other studies have suggested a cut-off point of 24 and 25 (Ranta, Kaltiala-
Heino, Rantanen, Tuomisto, & Marttunen, 2007; Sosic, Gieler, &
Stangier, 2008; Tsai, Wang, Juang, & Fuh, 2009). High internal
consistency (a = 0.84–0.92) has been reported (eg. Antony, Coons,
Scand J Psychol 61 (2020)
McCabe, Ashbaugh, & Swinson, 2006; M€ortberg & Jansson Fr€ ojmark,
2019). In the present study, the internal consistency was high (a = 0.92).
The Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory – Revised (OCI-R). To
evaluate divergent validity, OCI-R was used ( et al., 2002), that is, a
shorter version of the OCI (Swedish translation; Gr€onberg & Bates, 2009).
OCI-R measures symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), for
example: “I feel compelled to count while I am doing things.” The items
are answered on a five-step Likert scale. A cut-off score of 21 and above
is recommended for identifying OCD (Foa et al., 2002). High internal
consistency has been reported (a = 0.81–0.93) (e.g., Foa et al., 2002).
Internal consistency was high in the present study (a = 0.88).
The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS). To evaluate negative
convergent validity the SWLS (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985)
was employed. The scale includes five items measuring perceived
satisfaction with life, for example, “In most ways my life is close to my
ideal.” These are answered on a seven-step Likert scale. Scores of 14 and
below are indicative of being dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with life
(Pavot & Diener, 1993). High internal consistency has been reported for
the SWLS (a = 0.79–0.89) (eg. Pavot & Diener, 1993). The internal
consistency was high (a = 0.86) in the current study.
The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). The PHQ-9 (Kroenke,
Splitzer, & Williams, 2001) was used to further assess the divergent
validity of the SAS-SMU. The questionnaire measures symptoms of
depression during the last 2 weeks with nine items on a four-step Likert
scale for frequency of symptoms, for example: “Little interest or pleasure
in doing things.” A tenth item measuring the severity of symptoms was
excluded since it is answered with a qualitative grading. Scores of 15 and
above is the recommended cut-off point for identifying major depression
(Kroenke et al., 2001). High internal consistency has been reported in
previous studies (a = 0.86–0.89) (e.g., Kroenke et al., 2001). The PHQ-9
evidenced high internal consistency (a = 0.86) in the present study.
The Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 (GAD-7). For further
assessment of divergent validity of the SAS-SMU, GAD-7 was used
(Spitzer, Kroenke, Williams, & L€owe, 2006). The GAD-7 measures
symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder over the last 2 weeks. The scale
comprises seven items that are answered on a four-step Likert scale for
frequency of symptoms, for example: “Feeling nervous, anxious or on
edge.” Scores of 10 and above indicates the presence of a generalized
anxiety disorder (Spitzer et al., 2006). High internal consistency has been
reported for GAD-7 (a = 0.92) (e.g., Spitzer et al., 2006). Internal
consistency was high in the present study (a = 0.88).
Active and passive social media use. A custom social media usage
form was created for the purpose of this study for measuring passive,
active and total social media use. The definitions of active and passive use
were based on previous studies on social media use (e.g., Frison &
Eggermont, 2015, 2016). Active use was defined as commenting, sharing
content, and creating content or posting photos or videos. Active use was
not divided into private and public active use since privacy settings can
vary from user to user, across platforms and postings, making it hard to
reliably distinguish between the two in any accumulative self-reported
measure. Passive use was defined as looking through one’s feed, reading
comments, and watching videos or photos without commenting or sharing
the content in question. “Liking” was not included in any of the two
definitions since a previous study found that “liking” loaded on both
active and passive use when included in factor analysis (Escobar-Viera
et al.,2018). Categorizing “liking” as either type of use is therefore
conceptually and empirically complicated and could risk introducing
measurement errors. Participants were presented with the definitions of
active and passive use and then asked to fill in their average time spent in
minutes on passive and active use during an average weekday and day
during the weekend for the following social media: Facebook, Twitter,
Instagram, Google+, Snapchat, LinkedIn and YouTube. Measuring social
media usage by duration offers several benefits: (1) low risk for restriction
of range; (2) high face validity since longer durations of use indicates
problematic usage; and (3) estimating time spent on each social media
© 2020 The Authors. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology published by Scandinavian Psychological Associations and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Social anxiety and social media use 821
platform is relatively straightforward. The inclusion of social media was
based on the aforementioned definition, as well as Statista’s (2019)
ranking of social media with most active users. Separate chat functions,
for example, WhatsApp, discussion forums (e.g., Reddit) and country
specific social media were excluded. However, Facebook Messenger and
similar integral functions were not mentioned in the list of social media
but instead seen as included in the overall usage. The form was revised
after pilot testing, where posting videos was added to the definition of
active usage.
Analyses
In the first part of the study, we performed a psychometric evaluation of
Swedish SAS-SMU. Secondly, we explored associations between social
anxiety and different uses of social media. Analyses were carried out using
SPSS Statistics (SPSS) version 25 and Jamovi (running on an R backend)
with an alpha level set to 5% for all analyses.
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was used to explore the underlying
dimensions of SAS-SMU. The factor structure of the SAS-SMU has only
been examined in one previous study (Alkis et al., 2017) and EFA is
preferred when the factor structure of a scale is relatively unexplored
(Levine, 2005). Sampling adequacy was assessed with Kaiser-Meyer-
Olkin measure of sampling adequacy (KMO) and Barlett’s test of
Sphericity. Factor extraction was based on parallel analysis (Hayton,
Allen, & Scarpello, 2004). Accuracy of EFA is affected by the ratio
between sample size and items. A ratio of between 10:1 and 20:1
participants per item has been reported to generate an accurate factor
structure in 60–70% of cases (Costello & Osborne, 2005). In the present
study the ratio was approximately 15:1. Factors were deemed stable when
five or more loadings exceeded 0.50, in accordance with recommendations
by Costello and Osborne (2005).
Correlations (Pearson correlation coefficient) of SAS-SMU and the
remaining self-report measures (SPIN, OCI-R, SWLS, PHQ-9 and GAD-
7) were performed to assess the convergent and divergent validity of SAS-
SMU. During the initial phase of data collection, a survey error limited the
range of visible response options for the SWLS. In analyses that include
the SWLS, responses from this initial phase were removed from analyses
and considered missing completely at random. Lastly, two multiple
regression analyses were performed with demographic variables (gender
and age) and social anxiety (SPIN) as predictors for the SAS-SMU to
further explore its predictive validity. Assumptions of linearity,
homoscedasticity and little or no multicollinearity were met
(Tolerance = 0.94–0.99, VIF = 1.01–1.06).
For the second part, correlations of average social media use (for each
passive, active and total), and social anxiety (SAS-SMU and SPIN) were
performed. Additionally, correlations of ratios of active and passive use
and symptoms of social anxiety (SAS-SMU and SPIN) were computed.
Initial screening for outliers on the social media use variables, defined as
values two standard deviations beyond the mean, resulted in n = 29
participants being excluded from analyses including the passive use
variable, n = 69 excluded analyses when including the active use variable,
and n = 38 when including the total use variable.
RESULTS
Descriptive analyses
Descriptive statistics including means, standard deviations and
ranges for all measures are presented in Table 1. All means for
the self-report measures were below recommended cut-off points
for identification of a disorder.
Psychometric evaluation
Factor structure. The data were deemed appropriate for EFA
with a KMO value of 0.93 and a significant result for Barlett’s
822 O. J. Erliksson et al.
Table 1. Descriptive statistics for the self-report measures
Measure N Mean, (SD), range
SAS-SMU 333 51.6, (14.9), 21–102
SPIN 333 17, (12.3), 0–60
OCI-R 333 12, (9.78), 0–55
SWLS 58a 21.4, (6.45), 5–35
PHQ-9 333 7.08, (5.54), 0–24
GAD-7 333 5.16, (4.88), 0–21
Active social media use 314b 40.8, (78.9), 0–661
Passive social media use 319 142, (123), 2–934
Total social media use 307 182, (166), 2–1196
Notes: SAS-SMU = Social Anxiety Scale for Social Media Users;
SPIN = Social Phobia Inventory; OCI-R = Obsessive Compulsive
Inventory -Revised; SWLS = Satisfaction with Life Scale; PHQ-
9 = Patient Health Questionnaire; GAD-7 = Generalized Anxiety Disorder
7. For the social media usage variables values are expressed in average
amount of minutes devoted to the different usage types: active, passive or
total use.
a with 4.5% (r2 = 0.05) shared variance (see Table 5). Symptoms
Due to a survey error in the initial phase of data collection responses were
removed from analyses and considered missing completely at random.
b
Values two standard deviations beyond the mean were excluded.
test (v2 = 4168, p < 0.001). Three factors were retained after
extraction with maximum likelihood and oblimin rotation (see
Table 2). The factors were interpreted as follows: negative
evaluation anxiety (Factor 1), interaction anxiety (Factor 2) and
anxiety regarding privacy concerns (Factor 3). Negative
evaluation anxiety and anxiety regarding privacy concerns made
up stable factors (five or more item with loadings ≥0.50; Costello
& Osborne, 2005). Item 2 was the only item to load on two
factors with loadings below 0.40. The three factors accounted for
56.4% cumulative shared variance. Item 2 was deleted in a re-run
of the EFA, which however yielded the same three factors and a
cumulative shared variance of 56.8%.
Internal consistency. The internal consistency was excellent
(a = 0.92) for the SAS-SMU as a whole and was not notably
affected by deletion of items. All factors retained high internal
consistency, where Cronbach’s alpha was 0.91 for negative
evaluation anxiety (Factor 1), 0.89 for interaction anxiety (Factor
2), and 0.82 for anxiety regarding privacy concerns (Factor 3).
Convergent and divergent validity. Convergent validity was
evidenced with a strong association between SAS-SMU, negative
evaluation anxiety, interaction anxiety and symptoms of social
anxiety (SPIN) (see Table 3). Moderate relationships were shown
between SAS-SMU, its factors and symptoms of obsessive-
compulsive disorder (OCI-R), depression (PHQ-9) and
generalized anxiety disorder (GAD-7), which evidenced divergent
validity since they were weaker than those to social anxiety
(SPIN). Anxiety regarding privacy concern (Factor 3) showed
weaker relationships with all measurement scales in comparison,
although the relationship to social anxiety (SPIN) was still the
strongest. Satisfaction with life (SWLS) was strongly and
negatively correlated with SAS-SMU, as was expected based on
previous studies, and was therefore seen as evidencing negative
convergent validity.
Predictors. Two multiple regression models were run, where
Model 1 included symptoms of social anxiety (SPIN), gender and
© 2020 The Authors. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology published by Scandinavian Psychological Associations and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Scand J Psychol 61 (2020)
age, and Model 2 included symptoms of social anxiety (SPIN)
and gender. Significant results were retained for Model 1,
accounting for 53% (adjusted R2 = 0.53) of variance (see
Table 4). Age did not contribute significantly to Model 1, and
Model 2 was therefore run, which also showed significant results
and accounted for 52.9% (adjusted R2 = 0.529) of variance. This
indicated that SAS-SMU scores were predicted by symptoms of
social anxiety (SPIN) and gender, where those identifying as
women and unspecified gender had higher scores on average
compared to men.
Associations between social anxiety and different social media
uses
Passive and active social media use. Relationship strengths
between SAS-SMU and duration of social media use were
consistently weak (r < 30), with total usage being the strongest
of social anxiety (SPIN) was significantly correlated with passive
and total social media use, but with no significant correlation with
duration of active social media use. Comparison of the
correlations between passive use, symptoms of social anxiety
(SPIN) and SAS-SMU was done with a post hoc test (computer
software by Lee & Preacher, 2013; calculations based on Steiger,
1980), where a two-tailed test showed no significant difference
between these correlations (z = 0.96, p = 0.34). Exclusion of
outliers did not yield noteworthy changes in relationship
strengths. Quotas of passive and active use did not achieve
significant results in either analysis. Results indicate that social
anxiety measured with SAS-SMU is associated with longer
duration of total social media use as well as passive and active
use.
DISCUSSION
Psychometric evaluation
Results indicated that the Swedish SAS-SMU has satisfactory
psychometric properties. Three factors were retained with EFA
and interpreted as negative evaluation anxiety (Factor 1),
interaction anxiety (Factor 2) and anxiety regarding privacy
concerns (Factor 3). One item (Item 2) loaded on two factors,
which could indicate that talking about oneself on social media
may trigger both fear of negative evaluations (Factor 1) as well as
fear of interacting with others (Factor 2). Considering previous
studies on self-disclosure and social anxiety, the item in question
should have relevance, although a rewording should be
considered due to the low factor loading (<0.40). The same
applies to Item 11, where the low loading could be a result of the
translation of “tense” (Swe. “sp€and”), which can be associated
with muscle stiffness rather than nervousness or anxiety.
Differences can be seen in factor structure between the current
study and the previous study examining the SAS-SMU (Alkis
et al., 2017). Although two factors were nearly identical to factors
retained by Alkis et al. (2017), the fourth factor “Self-Evaluation
Anxiety” was not retained in this study. Differences in factor
structure could be due to cultural differences regarding the
manifestation of social anxiety. For instance, the acceptance of
Scand J Psychol 61 (2020) Social anxiety and social media use 823

Table 2. Factor loadings for items in Swedish translated SAS-SMU with items in the English backward translation sorted by factor

Factor

Anxiety
Negative regarding
evaluation Interaction privacy
Item anxiety anxiety concerns

21 I worry about that others might think I do odd things 0.81

15 I am worried about being mocked by others because of the content I have shared 0.77
19 I am worried about that the content I share will not be liked by others 0.76
10 I am afraid that my close friends will not accept my behaviour 0.69
14 I would feel uncomfortable if my friends publicly expressed their disapproval about the content I have 0.53
shared
17 I am worried about others disapproving of my behaviour 0.68
12 I am worried about that my friends in the presence of others will judge me by the content I have shared 0.70
7 I feel worried about making a negative impression on others 0.63
1 I worry about that people will evaluate me negatively 0.71
4 I worry about not living up to people’s expectations 0.69
8 I feel worried when talking with people I have just met 0.91
13 I feel nervous when talking with people I don’t know that well 0.89
5 I feel ill at ease while making new friends 0.71
11 I feel tense when I interact with someone on social media for the first time 0.41
16 I am afraid of interacting with others 0.76
2 I feel nervous when I have to talk with others about myself 0.37 0.38
18 The possibility that others can take part of my private information makes me feel anxious 0.91
6 The possibility of publicly sharing my private information makes me feel anxious 0.81
9 I feel ill at ease when my friends share my private information with people I don’t know 0.55
3 I would be concerned if someone got access to my profile without my permission 0.50
20 I feel worried about how companies behind social media handle information about my private life 0.71

Notes: n = 333. Factors retained by maximum likelihood and oblimin rotation. Items sorted by factors; original sorting indicated by item number.

Table 3. Correlation matrix for convergent and divergent validity for Swedish SAS-SMU

Measure 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. SAS-SMU –
2. F1 0.92*** –
3. F2 0.85*** 0.72*** –
4. F3 0.63*** 0.34*** 0.34*** –
5. SPIN 0.71*** 0.64*** 0.73*** 0.34*** –
6. OCI-R 0.41*** 0.37*** 0.41*** 0.18** 0.47*** –
7. SWLS 0.55*** 0.48*** 0.54*** 0.31* 0.60*** 0.33* –
8. PHQ-9 0.45*** 0.39*** 0.44*** 0.25*** 0.51*** 0.53*** 0.59*** –
9. GAD-7 0.40*** 0.36*** 0.40*** 0.21*** 0.50*** 0.56*** 0.43*** 0.73*** –

Notes: n = 333 for all except SWLS where n = 58 due to a survey error in the initial phase of data collection responses were removed from analyses and
considered missing completely at random. SAS-SMU = Social Anxiety Scale for Social Media Users; F1 = Negative Evaluation Anxiety; F2 = interaction
anxiety; F3 = Anxiety Regarding Privacy Concerns; SPIN = Social Phobia Inventory; OCI-R = Obsessive Compulsive Inventory -Revised;
SWLS = Satisfaction With Life Scale; PHQ-9 = Patient Health Questionnaire; GAD-7 = Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7.
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

social withdrawal and other behaviors associated with social
anxiety varies within different cultures (Spence & Rapee, 2016).
Other factors such as the translation itself or similarities in
wordings could also affect the structure, for instance the items in
Factor 1 mostly concerned “worry” and “concerns” (here
translated from Swedish). Since the English version of SAS-SMU
has not yet been validated, the possibility exists that its factor
structure is different from the Turkish version as well. Therefore,
the SAS-SMU needs to be further explored in different
populations to better understand its underlying dimensions.
SAS-SMU and two of its factors demonstrated convergent
validity with measurements of social anxiety (SPIN), negative
convergent validity with satisfaction with life (SWLS), as well as
divergent validity with measurements of obsessive compulsive
disorder (OCI-R), depression (PHQ-9) and generalized anxiety
disorder (GAD-7). Data were missing for satisfaction with life
(SWLS) however, making the inferences less reliable. Its third
factor, anxiety regarding privacy concerns, had a weaker
association with social anxiety (SPIN), although stronger than
with the other measures. The third factor relates to privacy

© 2020 The Authors. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology published by Scandinavian Psychological Associations and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
824 O. J. Erliksson et al. Scand J Psychol 61 (2020)

Table 4. Summary of multiple regression analyses for scores on SAS- 2016), which may also apply to social anxiety on social media.
SMU However, further studies with the inclusion of gender identities
are needed to verify this relationship.
SPIN, age and gender SPIN and gender

Variable B SE B t B SE B t
Social anxiety and different uses of social media
SPIN 0.82*** 0.05 16.88 0.83*** 0.05 18.08 Significant positive correlations although weak (r < 0.30) were
Age 0.06 0.06 1.03
shown between SAS-SMU and passive, active and total social
Gender (male): (REF) (REF) (REF) (REF)
Female 5.60*** 1.32 4.25 5.46*** 1.31 4.17 media use, the strongest relationship being with total usage.
Unspecified 8.20** 3.19 2.57 8.14* 3.18 2.56 Higher scores on the SAS-SMU was associated with longer use of
Intercept 39.84*** 2.39 16.66 37.81*** 1.37 27.65 social media on average, as well as a stronger correlation
R2 (adjusted) 0.53 0.53 coefficient for passive use compared to active use. Relationships
followed the same trend for SPIN, although with no significant
Notes: SPIN = Social Phobia Inventory; Unspecified = Other/Rather Not
Say. correlation with active use. Comparison of the correlation
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. coefficients for passive use and the SAS-SMU/SPIN did not yield
any significant results however, meaning the differences in
concerns on social media, which is not included in the other correlational strengths were not statistically significant. This might
measure and could therefore have affected the correlational indicate that both measures are useful for predicting at least
strengths. There are, however, no guidelines for assessing passive social media use and points to the strong relationship
convergent or divergent validity based on strengths of correlations between the two measures. Previous results in regards to social
(DeVellis, 2012). Correlational strengths can be affected by anxiety and time spent on social media have been inconclusive
similarities between measurement methods (Campbell & Fiske, (Prizant-Passal et al., 2016; Seabrook et al., 2016), thus the
1959), which would explain the relatively strong relationships of relationship between total social media use and social anxiety in
the diverging measures as the current study solely relied on self- the current study might be explained by a third and unknown
report measures. Seeing that the differences in relationship variable. The results are also at odds with one previous study
strengths were large between measures of social anxiety (SPIN) where passive use remained the only significant predictor for
(r > 0.70) and other measures (r > 0.53), the SAS-SMU seemed social anxiety (Shaw et al., 2015). It is likely that measuring
to measure symptoms of social anxiety in greater extent than the passive and active use in this manner has some inherent
remaining conditions. limitations: future studies should consider excluding social media
Gender and symptoms of social anxiety (SPIN) were significant that is primarily focused on passive use such as YouTube, since it
predictors for scores on the SAS-SMU. However, age did not is likely to overtake active use without being representative of the
contribute significantly to the models, contrarily to previous total social media usage. Since all uses of social media were
studies where scores of social anxiety declined with age positively associated with SAS-SMU, further studies are needed
(Furmark, 1999; Offord, Boyle, Campbell et al., 1996). Gender to explore social anxiety in this context. It is necessary to
differences were observed, where those who identified as women understand the functions of behaviors exhibited during social
and unspecified gender had higher scored on the SAS-SMU on media use and how they might be linked to social anxiety in
average. This is in line with previous studies reporting a higher order to include social media as an active part of treatment. If
prevalence of social anxiety among women (Asher, Asnaani, & anxiety maintaining behaviors were determined they could serve
Aderka, 2017; Furmark, 1999). Higher prevalence of depression as valuable information prior to exposure-based treatments. For
and anxiety has also been reported among non-binary and this reason, future studies should include clinically relevant
transgender (Reisner, Katz-Wise, Gordon, Corliss, & Austin, groups as well as control groups. Such groups could include

Table 5. Correlation matrix for SAS-SMU, SPIN and variables for social media use (duration)

Measure 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. SAS-SMU –
2. SPIN 0.71*** –
3. Passive use 0.21*** 0.25*** –
4. Active use 0.12* 0.06 0.33*** –
5. Total use 0.21*** 0.23*** 0.90*** 0.70*** –
6. Quota passive use 0.02 0.04 0.15*** 0.62*** 0.17*** –
7. Quota active use 0.02 0.04 0.15*** 0.62*** 0.17*** 1.0***

Notes: SAS-SMU = Social Anxiety Scale for Social Media Users (n = 333); SPIN = Social Phobia Inventory (n = 333); Passive use = mean (M) duration
(minutes) for passive social media use (n = 319); Active use = mean (M) duration (minutes) for active social media use (n = 314); Total = mean (M) total
duration (minutes) of social media use including passive and active use (n = 307); Quota passive use = ratio of passive use of total social media use
(n = 307); Quota active use = ratio of active use of total social media use (n = 307). Values two standard deviations beyond the mean were excluded for
the social media usage variables.
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

© 2020 The Authors. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology published by Scandinavian Psychological Associations and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Scand J Psychol 61 (2020)
individuals with diagnosed social anxiety disorder, generalized
anxiety disorder among others.
Limitations
This study has some limitations that need to be recognized.
Although sample size was sufficient for the analyses at hand, it
was relatively small and relatively homogenous, since most
participants were recruited at universities. Inferences and
comparisons of sample characteristics were also limited since no
data concerning occupation was collected. Results are likely to
vary between demographic groups and therefore needs to be taken
into consideration when interpreting the results of the current
study. Future research should explore measurement invariance of
the SAS-SMU between demographic groups (e.g., students and
employees, men and women) and clinical groups. As data
collection included only one time point, no estimation of test-
retest effects could be made, leaving one gap concerning the
psychometric properties of the Swedish SAS-SMU. Furthermore,
the measure for social media usage has not been previously tested
or validated. We found no indication of any measurement errors
regarding social media usage however.
Conclusion
The Swedish SAS-SMU showed satisfactory construct validity (a
stable three-factor solution), internal consistency, and convergent
and divergent validity. Positive and significant correlations were
found between SAS-SMU scores and passive, active as well as
total social media use (duration). We conclude that the Swedish
SAS-SMU shows satisfactory psychometric properties and can be
used for further studies on the role of social anxiety and different
social media usage patterns.
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The data that support the findings of this study are available on
request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly
available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.
REFERENCES
Alkis, Y., Kadirhan, Z. & Sat, M. (2017). Development and validation of
social anxiety scale for social media users. Computers in Human
Behavior, 72, 296–303.
Aluh, D. O., Chukwuobasi, T. & Mosanya, A. U. (2019). A cross-
sectional survey of social media anxiety among students of University
of Nigeria. BioRxiv. 666701. https://doi.org/10.1101/666701
American Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and statistical
manual of mental disorders (5th edn). Washington DC: Author.
Antony, M. M., Coons, M. J., McCabe, R. E., Ashbaugh, A. & Swinson,
R. P. (2006). Psychometric properties of the social phobia inventory:
Further evaluation. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44, 1177–1185.
Asher, M., Asnaani, A. & Aderka, I. M. (2017). Gender differences in
social anxiety disorder: A review. Clinical Psychology Review, 56, 1–
12.
Campbell, D. & Fiske, D. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation.
Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–104.
Carruthers, S. E., Warnock-Parkes, E. L. & Clark, D. M. (2019).
Accessing social media: Help or hindrance for people with social
© 2020 The Authors. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology published by Scandinavian Psychological Associations and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Social anxiety and social media use 825
anxiety? Journal of Experimental Psychopathology, 10, 1–11. https://d
oi.org/10.1177/2043808719837811
Connor, K. M., Davidson, J. R. T., Churchill, L. E., Sherwood, A.,
Weisler, R. H. & Foa, E. (2000). Psychometric properties of the Social
Phobia Inventory (SPIN): New self-rating scale. British Journal of
Psychiatry, 176, 379–386.
Costello, A. B. & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practise in exploratory
factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your
analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 10, 1–9.
DeVellis, R. F. (2012). Scale development: theory and applications (3rd
edn). Retrieved on 13 December 2019, from http://lib.ugent.be/catalog/
rug01:002184796.
Diener, E., Emmons, E. A., Larsen, R. J. & Griffin, S. (1985). The
satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–
75.
Escobar-Viera, C. G., Shensa, A., Bowman, N. D., Sidani, J. E., Knight,
J., James, A. E. et al. (2018). Passive and active social media use and
depressive symptoms among United States adults. Cyberpsychology,
Behavior, and Social Networking, 21, 437–443.
Farrell, L. J. (2019). Social media interaction: Effects on self-esteem and
anxiety comparing age, gender and socio-economic status. Bachelors
Final Year Project, Dublin Business School. Dublin: Dublin Business
School.
Fernandez, K. C., Levinson, C. A. & Rodebaugh, T. L. (2012). Profiling:
predicting social anxiety from Facebook profiles. Social Psychological
and Personality Science, 3, 706–713.
Foa, E. B., Huppert, J. D., Leiberg, S., Langner, R., Kichic, R., Hajcak, G.
et al. (2002). The obsessive-compulsive inventory: Development and
validation of a short version. Psychological Assessment, 14, 485–496.
Frison, E. & Eggermont, S. (2015). Toward an integrated and differential
approach to the relationships between loneliness, different types of
Facebook use and adolescents’ depressed mood. Communication
Research, 47(5), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650215617506
Frison, E. & Eggermont, S. (2016). Exploring the relationships between
different types of facebook use, perceived online social support, and
adolescents’ depressed mood. Social Science Computer Review, 34,
153–171.
Furmark, T. (1999). Social phobia in the general population: Prevalence
and sociodemographic profile. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric
Epidemiology, 34, 416–424.
Green, T., Wilhelmsen, T., Wilmots, E., Dodd, B. & Quinn, S. (2016).
Social anxiety, attributes of online communication and self-disclosure
across private and public Facebook communication. Computers in
Human Behavior, 58, 206–213.
Hayton, J. C., Allen, D. G. & Scarpello, V. (2004). Factor retention
decisions in exploratory factor analysis: a tutorial on parallel analysis.
Organizational Research Methods, 7, 191–205.
Indian, M. & Grieve, R. (2014). When Facebook is easier than face-to-
face: Social support derived from Facebook in socially anxious
individuals. Personality and Individual Differences, 59, 102–106.
Kroenke, K., Splitzer, R. L. & Williams, J. B. (2001). The PHQ-9:
validity of a Bried depression severity measure. Journal of General
Internal Medicine, 16, 606–613.
Lee, B. W. & Stapinski, L. A. (2012). Seeking safety on the internet:
Relationship between social anxiety and problematic internet use.
Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 26, 197–205.
Lee, I. A. & Preacher, K. J. (2013). Calculation for the test of the
difference between two dependent correlations with one variable in
common. Retrieved on 13 December 2019, from http://quantpsy.org.
Levine, T. R. (2005). Confirmatory factor analysis and scale validation in
communication research. Communication Research Reports, 22, 335–
338.
M€ortberg, E. & Jansson Fr€ ojmark, M. (2019). Psychometric evaluation of
the social phobia inventory and the mini-social phobia inventory in a
Swedish University student sample. Psychological Reports, 122, 323–
339.
Obar, J. A. & Wildman, S. (2015). Social media definition and the
governance challenge: An introduction to the special issue.
Telecommunications Policy, 39, 745–750.
826 O. J. Erliksson et al.
Offord, D. R., Boyle, M. H., Campbell, D., Goering, P., Lin, E., Wong,
M. et al. (1996). One-year prevalence of psychiatric disorder in
Ontarians 15 to 64 years of age. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 41,
559–563.
Pavot, W. & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life scale.
Psychological Assessment, 5, 164–172.
Prizant-Passal, S., Shechner, T. & Aderka, I. M. (2016). Social anxiety
and internet use –a meta-analysis: What do we know? What are we
missing? Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 221–229.
Ranta, K., Kaltiala-Heino, R., Rantanen, P., Tuomisto, M. T. &
Marttunen, M. (2007). Screening social phobia in adolescents from
general population: The validity of the Social Phobia Inventory
(SPIN) against a clinical interview. European Psychiatry, 22, 244–
251.
Reisner, S. L., Katz-Wise, S. L., Gordon, A. R., Corliss, H. L. & Austin,
S. B. (2016). Social epidemiology of depression and anxiety by gender
identity. Journal of Adolescent Health, 59, 203–208.
Ruggieri, S., Santoro, G., Pace, U., Passanisi, A. & Schimmenti, A.
(2020). Problematic Facebook use and anxiety concerning use of
social media in mothers and their offspring: An actor–partner
interdependence model. Addictive Behaviors Reports, 11(100256), 1–
5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abrep.2020.100256.
Seabrook, E. M., Kern, M. L. & Rickard, N. S. (2016). Social networking
sites, depression, and anxiety: a systematic review. JMIR Mental
Health, 3, e50.
Shaw, A. M., Timpano, K. R., Tran, T. B. & Joormann, J. (2015).
Correlates of Facebook usage patterns: The relationship between
passive Facebook use, social anxiety symptoms, and brooding.
Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 575–580.
© 2020 The Authors. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology published by Scandinavian Psychological Associations and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Scand J Psychol 61 (2020)
Sosic, Z., Gieler, U. & Stangier, U. (2008). Screening for social phobia in
medical in- and outpatients with the German version of the Social
Phobia Inventory (SPIN). Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 22, 849–859.
Spence, S. H. & Rapee, R. M. (2016). The etiology of social anxiety
disorder: An evidence-based model. Behaviour Research and Therapy,
86, 50–67.
Spitzer, R. L., Kroenke, K., Williams, J. B. W. & L€ owe, B. (2006). A
brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: The GAD-7.
Archives of Internal Medicine – New Series-, 166, 1092–1097.
Statista (2019). Most famous social network sites 2019, by active users.
Retrieved on 13 December 2019, from https://www.statista.com/sta
tistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/.
Steiger, J. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix.
Psychological Bulletin, 87, 245–251.
Thorisdottir, I. E., Sigurvinsdottir, R., Asgeirsdottir, B. B., Allegrante, J.
P. & Sigfusdottir, I. D. (2019). Active and passive social media use
and symptoms of anxiety and depressed mood among icelandic
adolescents. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 22,
535–542.
Tsai, C. F., Wang, S. J., Juang, K. D. & Fuh, J. L. (2009). Use of the
Chinese (Taiwan) version of the Social Phobia Inventory (SPIN)
among early adolescents in rural areas: Reliability and validity study.
Journal of the Chinese Medical Association, 72, 422–429.
Weidman, A. C., Fernandez, K. C., Levinson, C. A., Augustine, A. A.,
Larsen, R. J. & Rodebaugh, T. L. (2012). Compensatory internet use
among individuals higher in social anxiety and its implications for
well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 191–195.
Received 13 December 2019, accepted 24 June 2020