{{ supportNote }}
| # | Higher-load focus | Lighter anchor |
|---|---|---|
| {{ row.id }} | {{ row.highLabel }} ({{ row.highScore }}) | {{ row.lowLabel }} ({{ row.lowScore }}) |
The gauge keeps the raw 0 to 144 total intact while making the published 30 and 60 LSAS-SR self-report anchors visible at a glance.
Fear and avoidance stay separate here so you can see whether the score is being carried more by internal distress or by behavioral shrinking across performance and interaction situations.
| Subscale | Fear | Avoidance | Total | Share of max |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| {{ row.label }} | {{ row.fear }} | {{ row.avoidance }} | {{ row.total }} | {{ row.share }} |
The ladder keeps the published 30 and 60 self-report cutoffs visible and, when a prior score is entered, adds a raw-score comparison without changing the LSAS-SR total itself.
| Reference | Range | Status | How to read it |
|---|---|---|---|
| {{ row.label }} | {{ row.range }} | {{ row.status }} | {{ row.note }} |
This chart ranks the highest-scored situations so the score drivers are obvious before you try to generalize from the total alone.
| # | Highest-load situations | Total |
|---|---|---|
| {{ row.id }} | {{ row.label }} | {{ row.total }}/6 |
Exports keep the original item wording with the selected fear and avoidance ratings so you can review the pattern outside the browser if needed.
| # | Situation | Domain | Fear | Avoidance | Total | Pattern |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| {{ row.id }} | {{ row.text }} | {{ row.domainLabel }} | {{ row.fearLabel }} | {{ row.avoidanceLabel }} | {{ row.total }}/6 | {{ row.patternLabel }} |
The JSON export mirrors the completed result structure so another tool or a follow-up script can reuse the totals, anchors, and item-level answers.
Social anxiety is not only a feeling of nervousness. It is also a pattern of fear about being watched, judged, embarrassed, or rejected in everyday encounters, and that fear can gradually shape behavior by making avoidance feel safer than participation.
The Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale - Self Report, usually shortened to LSAS-SR, is a 24-item questionnaire built to capture both sides of that pattern. This package asks how much fear you felt and how often you avoided each situation during the past week, then turns those answers into a total score, separate fear and avoidance subtotals, and a readable severity summary.
The page is useful when you want more structure than a vague sense that social situations have become hard. A person who dreads speaking up at meetings may need a different starting point from someone whose strongest scores cluster around meeting strangers, making eye contact, or initiating conversation, even if both people feel that "social anxiety" is the right broad label.
The result screen is designed to make that pattern easier to talk about. It shows the total score first, then adds a gauge, quick summary badges, a short explanation of what the current band means, a package-specific read on whether scores lean more toward performance situations or interaction situations, and a table that pairs higher-scored situations with lower-scored anchors.
Routine scoring happens in the browser and answer export is optional, but the output still deserves the same care as any other mental-health note. The LSAS-SR is a screening aid rather than a diagnosis, and if social anxiety is causing major impairment or you feel unsafe, outside clinical support matters more than the convenience of a quick score.
The workflow is straightforward. After the opening screen, you move through 24 familiar situations one by one, rating fear on a 0 to 3 scale and avoidance on a separate 0 to 3 scale. Results do not appear until every situation has both ratings, so the summary always reflects a complete run rather than a partial guess.
That two-part structure matters in practice. Two people can reach a similar total in very different ways: one may feel strong fear but still keep showing up, while another may report lower fear in the moment because avoidance is already doing much of the work. Reading fear and avoidance together is often more useful than staring at the total alone.
The package also tries to turn the score into something you can act on. It counts how many situations reached moderate-or-higher intensity, highlights the most heavily scored situations, flags whether avoidance is running ahead of fear or vice versa, and writes brief next-step suggestions that change with the score band and the overall pattern.
The LSAS-SR is also better at showing change over time than at delivering a one-off verdict. If you repeat it, keep the same past-week frame and answer under roughly similar circumstances so that a higher or lower score reflects real movement rather than a different interpretation of the questions.
The scoring model is simple. Each of the 24 situations receives one fear rating and one avoidance rating, both as whole numbers from 0 to 3. Fear uses None, Mild, Moderate, and Severe. Avoidance uses Never, Occasionally, Often, and Usually.
Those ratings are added in three ways. Fear ratings sum to a fear subtotal from 0 to 72. Avoidance ratings sum to an avoidance subtotal from 0 to 72. The tool then adds those subtotals into one total score from 0 to 144, which is the number used for the main severity band and the gauge chart.
| Score range | Band shown by the package | How to read it |
|---|---|---|
| 0 to 29 | None | Little or no social-anxiety burden is being reported here. |
| 30 to 49 | Mild | Symptoms are present, but they may still be limited to selected situations. |
| 50 to 64 | Moderate | Social anxiety is becoming harder to ignore and often affects activity choices. |
| 65 to 79 | Marked | Interference is more likely to be noticeable in work, study, or relationships. |
| 80 to 144 | Severe | The reported burden is high and usually warrants closer clinical attention. |
Published LSAS-SR screening studies often pay special attention to totals around 30 and 60, because those cut points were useful in clinical samples for identifying social anxiety disorder and more generalized presentations. This page keeps those ideas in the background but spreads the scale into five display bands so the summary can stay readable across lower, middle, and higher parts of the 0 to 144 range.
The package also adds several analytics that are useful but not official published subscales. It counts Breadth as the number of situations where fear or avoidance reached at least 2, and it counts High-intensity items when either rating reached 3. It also compares fear and avoidance totals; a gap of 6 points or more is enough for the summary to say that avoidance is running ahead of fear or that fear is running ahead of avoidance.
One more layer is a package-specific orientation split. The page totals a built-in subset of performance-heavy items such as giving a talk, being observed, speaking up at a meeting, taking a test, and giving a report, then compares that subtotal with the rest of the questionnaire. That can be a helpful reading aid, but it should be treated as this tool's own summary logic rather than as an official LSAS scoring standard.
Technically, the visible package has no server-side scoring helper. The chart, the summary blocks, the answer table, and the CSV and DOCX answer exports are all generated from the answers entered in the page itself.
The most important number is the total score, but it is not the only useful one. A total in the mild range may still hide one or two situations that are strongly avoided, while a higher total may come from many moderate ratings spread across daily life. That is why the better question is often "Where is this showing up?" rather than "What band did I get?"
The package bands should be treated as conversation ranges, not as a diagnosis. Scores at or above 30 deserve attention because they move past the lowest part of the scale, and scores near or above 60 are especially notable because published screening work has treated that level as a meaningful clinical signal. Even so, impairment, history, treatment context, and other mental-health conditions still matter.
The fear-versus-avoidance split adds another layer. When avoidance is clearly ahead, you may already be shrinking or reorganizing daily life around anxiety. When fear is ahead, you may still be entering difficult situations but paying a high internal cost. Neither pattern is "better"; they simply point toward different practical questions and different first steps.
The orientation summary is helpful when the result is uneven. A performance-leaning profile suggests trouble with observation, public speaking, meetings, tests, or reports. An interaction-leaning profile points more toward conversation, contact with unfamiliar people, authority, or assertive social tasks. A mixed profile means the strain is broader and less tied to one style of situation.
If you repeat the tool, treat movement near a boundary with caution. A score of 49 and a score of 50 land in different display bands even though the numerical difference is small. Trend value is best when the time window, circumstances, and level of stress are kept as comparable as possible from one run to the next.
Suppose the fear subtotal is 24 and the avoidance subtotal is 14, for a total of 38. The package labels that as Mild. A result like this often describes someone who still enters many situations but pays a noticeable emotional cost while doing so, so the next useful step is usually a small exposure plan rather than broad withdrawal from social demands.
Now suppose fear totals 31 and avoidance totals 40, for a total of 71. That lands in the Marked band, and the page would also describe avoidance as running ahead of fear. In practice, that pattern suggests the person may already be limiting work, school, or relationship opportunities, which is why structured support becomes more important than self-monitoring alone.
Imagine a total of 52 driven mostly by giving a talk, working while observed, taking a test, speaking up at a meeting, and giving a report to a group, while casual conversation scores are lower. The package would likely read that as Moderate and Performance-leaning. That matters because a focused plan around observation and performance tasks may be more useful than treating every social situation as equally difficult.
No. It scores a self-report questionnaire and explains the pattern in plain language, but diagnosis depends on clinical assessment, functional impairment, history, and context beyond one questionnaire result.
Because those are related but not identical. A person can feel intense fear and still show up, or avoid so consistently that fear seems lower simply because difficult situations are no longer happening very often.
No. They are package-specific reading aids created from a built-in subset of performance-heavy items versus the rest of the questionnaire, which can help interpretation without replacing published LSAS scoring conventions.
Yes, but the comparison is most useful when you keep the same past-week frame and note any major changes in stress, treatment, routines, or life events that could change the answers.
Routine scoring, charting, and answer export happen in the browser, and the visible package has no server-side scoring helper for LSAS-SR answers. If you choose to export the result, treat that file as sensitive personal information.