社交焦虑是一种最普遍的情绪障碍，表现为个体面对社交场合时的过度不安和恐惧。社交焦虑常起病于青少年时期，持续时间长，很难自行缓解。对于有较高社交焦虑情绪但是还没有达到社交焦虑障碍诊断标准的大学生而言，高的社交焦虑仍然会导致他们社会功能受损，并有可能加剧症状严重程度，从而增加罹患社交焦虑障碍的风险。 本研究旨在探讨改编自美国波士顿大学Stefan G.Hofmann博士的社交焦虑认知行为团体干预方案对我国高职大一新生的适用性和干预效果，并初步探讨社交焦虑缓解的机制。 本研究采用交往焦虑量表（IAS），对江苏省某高职院校2111名新生进行筛查，筛选出总分≥49的学生376人，随机抽取进行结构化面谈，最终确定被试80人，随机分配进入干预组（40人）和等待组（40人）。干预组使用认知行为干预技术进行持续8周，每周一次三小时的团体干预，等待组在此期间不做任何干预。使用交往焦虑量表（IAS）、负性评价恐惧量表（FNE）、社交回避与苦恼量表（SAD）、自动思维问卷（ATQ）对干预组和等待组进行了四次测量（干预前、干预中、干预后、三个月追踪）。 经过数据统计，干预组和等待组的前测数据在IAS、FNE、SAD、ATQ总分和SAD苦恼维度及SAD回避维度得分都没有显著差异，表明干预组和等待组是同质的；干预组和等待组在干预后的比较显示，干预组IAS、FNE、SAD、ATQ总分和SAD苦恼维度及SAD回避维度得分都显著低于等待组，这说明经过干预，干预组IAS、FNE、SAD、ATQ总分和SAD苦恼维度及SAD回避维度得分均有明显的降低；干预组和等待组前测、中测分数改变量的比较，前测、后测分数改变量的比较，前测、追踪测分数改变量的比较，干预组IAS、FNE、SAD、ATQ和SAD苦恼维度及SAD回避维度分数的改变量均显著高于等待组，说明干预组不仅在干预结束后效果显著，并且效果在三个月的追踪期得到了维持。 在验证了CBT对社交焦虑的干预效果的前提下，进一步分析干预的认知机制。得出结论：负性自动思维的改善，是干预造成个体回避症状改善的中介因素。同时，负性自动思维的改善也是干预造成负性评价恐惧即时减少和长期降低的中介因素。 本研究表明，认知行为团体干预对高职生的社交焦虑症状具有显著改善作用，而且负性自动思维的改善是干预产生效果的重要认知机制。

Social anxiety is one of the most common emotional disorders, manifested as the excessive anxiety and fear of individuals facing social situations. Social anxiety often begins in adolescence and lasts long and is difficult to alleviate. With high social anxiety but haven't reached the social anxiety disorder diagnosis standard of college students, the high social anxiety can lead to their social function is impaired, and is likely to exacerbate symptom severity, thereby increasing the risk of suffering from social anxiety disorder. This study was to explore adaptation of Boston university Stefan we Dr Hofmann social anxiety of cognitive behavior group intervention program for the applicability of the higher vocational freshmen and intervention effect in our country, and discussed the mechanism of social anxiety relief. This research adopted the interaction anxiety scale (IAS), screening for a 2111 freshmen in higher vocational colleges in Jiangsu province, a total of 49 or screened out student 376 people, a random sample of structured interviews, ultimately determined the subjects of 80 people, were randomized into intervention group (40) and wait-and-see group (40). The intervention group used cognitive behavioral intervention techniques for eight weeks, three hours a week for group intervention, and the wait-and-see group did not intervene during this period. The intervention group and the wait-and-see group were measured four times (intervention before and after the intervention, intervention in, three months tracking) using interaction anxiety scale (IAS), negative evaluation scale (FNE) fear, social avoidance and distress scale (SAD), automatic thoughts questionnaire (ATQ) . Through the data statistics, the intervention group and wait-and-see group before the test data in IAS, FNE, SAD, ATQ total score and SAD and SAD bitterness dimension avoidance dimension scores were no significant differences, suggested that intervention group and wait-and-see group was homogeneous; Intervention group and wait-and-see group after the intervention, according to the comparison of intervention group IAS, FNE, SAD, ATQ scores and SAD and SAD bitterness dimension avoidance dimension scores were significantly lower than wait-and-see group, suggesting that after intervention, intervention group IAS, FNE, SAD, ATQ scores and SAD and SAD bitterness dimension avoidance dimension scores were significantly lower; Intervention group, and wait a pretest, changes in test scores in the comparison of measured before and after the comparison of test scores change quantity, measurement, tracking test scores before the comparison, the amount of change intervention group IAS, FNE, SAD, ATQ and SAD and SAD bitterness dimension avoidance dimension scores of change were significantly higher than waiting for the group, intervention group that not only at the end of the intervention effect is remarkable, and the effect is to maintain in the three months of follow-up. The cognitive mechanism of intervention was further analyzed under the premise of verifying the effect of CBT on social anxiety. Conclusion: the improvement of negative automatic thinking is the mediating factor which causes the individual to avoid the improvement of symptoms. At the same time, the improvement of negative automatic thinking is also the mediating factor of the negative evaluation fear and the long-term reduction. This study shows that cognitive behavioral group intervention significantly improves the social anxiety symptoms of high vocational students, and the improvement of negative automatic thinking is an important cognitive mechanism for the effect of intervention.