Gender and Age Differences in Social Anxiety as Measured by the Croatian Version of the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale on a Representative Sample of the Population of the Republic of Croatia

Osnovna svrha istraživanja bila je provjeriti rodne i dobne razlike u socijalnoj anksioznosti te metrijske karakteristike hrvatske inačice Liebowitzeve ljestvice socijalne anksioznosti (1). Provedeno je istraživanje na reprezentativnom uzorku od 1000 građana i građanki Republike Hrvatske korištenjem Hendalovog on line panela istraživanja. Rezultati pokazuju da se podljestvicom straha objašnjava 52,1 % varijance za strah i podljestvicom izbjegavanja 47.5 % za izbjegavanje. Na obje ljestvice dobivena su 4 ista faktora s podudaranjem u 20 od 24 tvrdnje te se tri faktora mogu nazvati istim imenom kao faktori iz originalne Liebowitzeve ljestvice. Rezultati na svih 7 predloženih mjera koje se dobivaju upitnikom ukazuju na statistički značajno veći rezultat kod žena u odnosu na muškarce te kod mlađih osoba u odnosu na starije sa srednjim veličinama efekta za ukupne rezultate, a udio socijalno anksioznih sudionika (14,4 %) blizak je podatcima iz literature. Zaključno se ljestvica može smatrati adekvatnom te primjenjivom u daljnjim istraživanjima.The main purpose of this study was to examine gender and age differences in social anxiety and the metric characteristics of the Croatian version of the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (1). The study was conducted on a representative sample of 1000 citizens of the Republic of Croatia using Hendal’s online research panel. The results show that the fear subscale explains 52.1% of the variance for fear and the avoidance subscale explains 47.5% for avoidance. Four of the same factors were obtained on both scales; matching in 20 of the 24 statements, and three factors could be called by the same name as the factors from the original Liebowitz scale. The results of all seven proposed questionnaire measures indicate a statistically significantly higher score for women compared with men and for younger people compared with the elderly, with average effect sizes for overall results, and a proportion of socially anxious participants (14.4%) that was similar to the literature data. In conclusion, the scale can be considered adequate and applicable in further research