negative, leading to cycles of self-preoccupation and worry. Thus both con-
structs have been shown to relate to various biases in self-concept that leave
the person prone to negative affect. Social anxiety, for example, relates to
various negative self-beliefs, low self-esteem, and low self-efficacy in social
settings, biases that may be related to an underlying ‘relational schema’ that
represents beliefs that one will be rejected by other people (Leary, 2001).
Again, the smaller literature on driving anxiety supports a similar conclusion.
Anxiety-prone drivers see themselves as less competent and more accident-
prone, in comparison to those low in dispositional anxiety (Matthews, 2002).
Thus, all three forms of contextualized anxiety are potentially maladap-
tive, in that the anxious person is ill equipped to handle the potentially threat-
ening situations congruent with the trait, whether these are talking to strang-
ers, taking a difficult test or driving in adverse road conditions. Test anxiety
may lead to poorer career outcomes, and social anxiety may hinder the devel-
opment of personal friendships and sexual relationships (e.g., Endler, 1983).
However, there is an upside to all three traits. Test anxiety may be motivating
in the absence of immediate pressures to perform. Zeidner (1998) reviewed
various studies suggesting that high test anxious subjects may outperform
low test anxious subjects in reassuring environments for performance, in line
with the principle that anxiety generates compensatory effort (Eysenck &
Calvo, 1992). Social anxiety may also have an adaptive function in that a re-
alistic and proportionate concern about others’ opinions and evaluations can
inhibit behavior that is socially unacceptable (Leitenberg, 1990). Indeed,
when placed in evaluative situations, high socially anxious subjects may dem-
onstrate enhanced processing of information concerning potential evalua-
tions (Smith, Ingram, & Brehm, 1983). Thus, high and low social anxiety may
represent adaptations toward different goals. The socially anxious person is
concerned with avoiding disapproval, leading to self-protective behavioral
strategies (Meleshko & Alden, 1993). By contrast, the person low in social
anxiety may be motivated to gain approval and social dominance through ac-
quisitive strategies that are designed to lead to rewarding social outcomes
(Arkin, 1987).
Finally, driving anxiety provides an interesting example of how the adap-
tive perspective adds to the deficit account of anxiety traits. Although anxiety
is linked to objective performance decrements on the driving simulator, and
to self-reported errors while driving, anxiety does not predict overall accident
likelihood (see Matthews, 2002, for a review of the evidence). It turns out that
anxiety is also related to more cautious behaviors, including, on the simula-
tor, slower speed and reluctance to pass in heavy traffic, effects that may be
mediated by judgment and decision making. In real life, anxiety correlates
with fewer speeding tickets. Thus, the dangers of worry and cognitive inter-
ference are balanced by the benefits of lower risk taking. All the various
contextualized anxiety traits may represent an adaptation characterized by
- TRAITS, STATES, AND INTELLECTUAL FUNCTIONING 157