Reliability

     A key advantage behind studying two different samples of love-
shy men is that an opportunity is provided for ascertaining the reliability
of findings. The term "reliability" here means repeatability. Every
researcher must be concerned about whether different samples of people
with the same problem will reflect the same pattern of findings. If the
findings obtained for one group of love-shy men turn out quite different
from the findings obtained for a second group of love-shy men, there
might be good reason to question the accuracy and validity of any con-
clusions that might be drawn. Simply put, if research findings turn out
to be quite different for two groups of the same (love-shy) description,
serious doubt would be cast upon the overall reliability of any of the
obtained findings. On the other hand, if essentially the same findings
accrued for two totally separate groups of love-shy men, we could be
reasonably confident as to the reliability (repeatability) of the data. In
essence, we could feel reasonably confident about obtaining basically
the same research findings for any group of love-shy men we might
choose to study, no matter where in the western world those love-shy
men might reside.
      However, one note of caution is in order here. It is of the utmost
importance that different researchers working in different geographic
areas obtain their love-shy samples using the same criteria as to what
does and does not constitute love-shyness. To the extent that different
researchers define "love-shyness" in different ways, quite different find-
ings can quite legitimately be expected with each new study that is
published.
     As mentioned earlier, Philip Zimbardo employed a very loose
approach for determining who is and who is not shy. He simply asked
people whether or not they consider themselves to be shy. And 42
percent usually said "yes". Now 42 percent is a rather large fraction of
the population. Moreover, most of the 42 percent who said "yes" did
not have their day-to-day lives "cramped" or harmed to any major extent
by their respective shyness problems.
     On the other hand, when I first began the study to be dealt with
in this book I realized that the lives of certain victims of shyness are
severely harmed and encroached upon by love-shyness. After all, if a
person cannot date at all, if he is deprived of any opportunities for
marriage, sexual expression (apart from masturbation), and from family
formation, etc., then it is quite clear that his shyness wields a continuing
and very destructive, debilitating impact upon his life.
     Hence, I decided that it was this highly debilitating, chronic and
intractable type of shyness that was really worth studying. This is not
to imply that lesser kinds of shyness are unimportant or that they are
not worth studying and understanding. The point is that we need to
get a good grip on the more serious varieties of the problem first because
they cause the most suffering and wastage of human resources. The fact
that a very high proportion of the less serious forms of shyness undergo
spontaneous remission seems to further suggest that the everyday "gar-
den variety" shyness may have a very different constellation of under-
lying causes than the more serious forms of love-shyness that are dealt
with in this book. And indeed if the causes are different, then different
forms of therapy and of preventive efforts may ultimately be warrented.