The Submissive Behaviour Scale

Abstract

The Submissive Behaviour Scale (SBS) is a prominent psychometric instrument developed by Paul Gilbert and Steven Allan (1994; Allan & Gilbert, 1997) designed to measure self-reported submissive and appeasement behaviors in interpersonal situations. Grounded in evolutionary psychology, ethology, and social rank theory, the scale operationalizes submission as an adaptive yet potentially maladaptive biobehavioral response to perceived social threat, subordinate status, and competitive defeat. The SBS comprises 16 self-report items evaluated on a 5-point Likert-type frequency scale ranging from 0 (Never) to 4 (Always), yielding a total score between 0 and 64. Psychometric evaluations across clinical and non-clinical populations demonstrate high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha typically ranging from .85 to .89), solid four-month test-retest reliability ($r = .84$), and robust convergent and construct validity with measures of depression, social anxiety, internal shame, and unfavorable social comparison. Confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses predominantly substantiate a robust unidimensional structure reflecting generalized submissive posture, with secondary dimensions capturing verbal concession, non-verbal appeasement, and conflict avoidance. This article presents a thorough psychometric and theoretical review of the SBS, analyzing its evolutionary foundations, measurement parameters, clinical applications in mood and anxiety disorders, factor stability, and empirical utility.

Keywords

Submissive Behaviour Scale, Paul Gilbert, Social Rank Theory, Evolutionary Psychiatry, Subordination, Appeasement, Depression, Social Anxiety, Psychometrics, Factor Analysis, Construct Validity

Authors

The Submissive Behaviour Scale was developed and refined through collaborative empirical investigations led by:

• Paul Gilbert, Ph.D., FBPsS, OBE: Professor of Clinical Psychology at the University of Derby and former Head of the Mental Health Research Unit at Kingsway Hospital, Derby, United Kingdom. Gilbert is internationally recognized as the founder of Compassion Focused Therapy (CFT) and a pioneer in applying evolutionary models, social rank dynamics, and ethological signaling systems to psychopathology, notably affective disorders and shame.
• Steven Allan, Ph.D.: Clinical psychologist and academic researcher affiliated with the University of Leicester and the Mental Health Research Unit at Kingsway Hospital, Derby. Allan has contributed extensively to the empirical validation of social rank metrics, social comparison scales, and their intersections with clinical psychopathology.

Initial conceptualization emerged from work by Gilbert and Allan (1994) adapting behavioral frequency protocols, which culminated in the finalized 16-item scale published in their seminal 1997 psychometric investigation in the British Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Purpose

The Submissive Behaviour Scale was engineered to resolve critical empirical and clinical limitations in the assessment of interpersonal hierarchy, passivity, and assertion. Prior to its introduction, interpersonal passivity was predominantly assessed through unipolar assertiveness inventories. However, evolutionary and clinical theories suggest that submissive behavior is not merely the absence of assertiveness; rather, it constitutes an active, coordinated, defensive behavioral strategy designed to pacify dominant conspecifics, mitigate physical or relational harm, and signal subordinate acceptance to prevent expulsion from social groups (Gilbert, 1992; Allan & Gilbert, 1997).

From a clinical perspective, elevated submissive behavior is a core vulnerability and maintenance factor across numerous psychological disorders. In major depressive disorder, submission often manifests as the downstream consequence of the “involuntary defeat strategy,” wherein an individual perceives themselves as structurally inferior, trapped, and incapable of winning competitive encounters. In social anxiety disorder, submissive behaviors function as safety strategies intended to avert conflict, scrutiny, or hostile rejection. The purpose of the SBS is to measure these behavioral topographies quantitatively, providing researchers and clinicians with a validated metric to:

• Quantify the frequency of behavioral concessions, overt appeasement signals, and conflict avoidance tactics.
• Evaluate therapeutic progress in interventions targeting social hierarchy distress, such as Compassion Focused Therapy, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), and assertiveness training.
• Examine the evolutionary-psychological hypotheses linking perceived subordinate status, involuntary subordination, and dysregulated affect.
• Differentiate between functional adaptive appeasement and chronic, maladaptive submissiveness linked to chronic psychopathology.

Psychological Construct

The core construct measured by the SBS is interpersonal submissive behavior. In ethology and evolutionary psychology, submissive behaviors are functional displays exhibited by lower-ranking group members during competitive conflicts. When two individuals compete for resources, status, territory, or mates, the individual who evaluates their Resource Holding Potential (RHP) as inferior emits submissive displays to terminate the contest, inhibit further aggression from the dominant individual, and preserve group cohesion without suffering physical injury or death (Price et al., 1994).

In humans, this biosocial mechanism has evolved into complex cognitive, affective, and behavioral patterns. Gilbert and Allan conceptualized human submissive behavior across several interrelated behavioral manifestations:

1. Conceding and Self-Diminishment

This dimension reflects explicit verbal or behavioral surrender during disagreements, even when the individual internally recognizes their own competence or correctness. For instance, agreeing that one is wrong despite knowing otherwise (Item 1) or enduring unfair criticism without offering a defense (Item 4) exemplifies tactical self-diminishment to neutralize relational threat.

2. Placation and Hyper-Apologetic Deference

Placation involves positive appeasement signals designed to elicit reassurance or benign tolerance from others. Repeatedly apologizing for trivial errors (Item 7) or offering exaggerated, enthusiastic gratitude for minor favors (Item 12) functions as an appeasement display indicating non-hostile intent and elevated respect toward others.

3. Expressive and Non-Verbal Inhibition

Submissive individuals often suppress behavioral dominance markers. This manifests as gaze avoidance (Item 13), aversion to being looked at directly (Item 11), autonomic surrender markers such as blushing (Item 15), and linguistic cessation when interrupted or overridden by others (Item 6).

4. Conflict Avoidance and Social Withdrawal

Avoidance behaviors aim to preemptively sidestep social contests where subordinate ranking might be confirmed or challenged. Examples include manufacturing excuses such as illness to decline invitations (Item 16), refusing to question a store clerk who gave incorrect change (Item 3), and failing to express warranted anger to close friends (Item 9).

Theoretical Framework

The Submissive Behaviour Scale is anchored in Social Rank Theory of psychopathology, synthesized extensively by Paul Gilbert, John Price, and Russell Gardner (Gilbert, 1989, 1992, 2000; Price et al., 1994). Social Rank Theory integrates principles from sociobiology, evolutionary ethology, and clinical psychiatry to explain how human emotional states are regulated by perceptions of relative power, social status, and social acceptance.

According to this model, human groups establish dominance hierarchies governed by competitive dynamics. While non-human animals negotiate hierarchy primarily through physical agonistic encounters (Resource Holding Potential), humans utilize both physical power and Social Attention Holding Power (SAHP). SAHP denotes an individual’s ability to attract positive social attention, prestige, affection, and respect through valuable talents, warmth, and competencies (Gilbert, 1997).

When an individual perceives that their SAHP or RHP is markedly low relative to their peers, an ancient biobehavioral system known as the Involuntary Defeat Strategy (IDS) is engaged. The IDS induces feelings of depression, inferiority, low self-efficacy, and chronic defeat. Concurrently, it drives submissive behavior to protect the subordinate organism from escalating hostility by dominant group members. Submissive signaling communicates: “I do not contest your dominance; I am harmless; do not attack or expel me.”

Furthermore, the scale draws conceptually from the Act-Frequency Approach pioneered by Buss and Craik (1986). Rather than conceptualizing submission merely as an abstract intrapsychic disposition, Buss and Craik demonstrated that personality dispositions are manifested as cumulative frequencies of observable prototypical acts. Gilbert and Allan (1994) leveraged this paradigm to assemble distinct, real-world behavioral scripts characterizing interpersonal surrender, placation, and deference, producing an instrument that reflects concrete behavioral frequencies rather than broad speculative self-perceptions.

Validity

The psychometric validity of the Submissive Behaviour Scale has been established across clinical, student, and community samples worldwide, corroborating its theoretical architecture through construct, convergent, discriminant, and predictive paradigms.

Construct and Convergent Validity

Allan and Gilbert (1997) documented strong positive correlations between the SBS and established indices of psychopathology in both clinical depressed patients ($N = 65$) and undergraduate students ($N = 107$). Specifically, submissive behavior demonstrated robust correlations with:

• Depressive Symptomatology: High correlations with the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), typically yielding $r$ values between .50 and .65 ($p < .001$), supporting the premise that involuntary subordination is deeply intertwined with depressive affect.
• Social Comparison and Inferiority: Significant inverse correlations with the Social Comparison Scale (SCS; $r = -.52$ to $-.61$), indicating that individuals who judge themselves as inferior, less capable, and of lower social rank exhibit significantly higher frequencies of submissive displays.
• Internal and External Shame: Strong associations with the Internalized Shame Scale (ISS) and the Other As Shamer scale (OAS; $r = .55$ to $.68$), confirming that the threat of negative evaluation and external judgment triggers appeasement routines.
• Social Anxiety: Elevated scores on the SBS correlate consistently ($r = .48$ to $.62$) with measures of social phobia, such as the Social Phobia and Anxiety Inventory (SPAI) and Fear of Negative Evaluation (FNE).

Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity is supported by studies showing that the SBS does not simply reflect general negative affectivity or non-interpersonal distress. When controlling for trait neuroticism or generalized somatic anxiety, the unique variance in SBS scores continues to predict interpersonal vulnerability and specific depressive profiles characterized by interpersonal sensitivity, self-criticism, and powerlessness. Additionally, correlations between the SBS and physical health complaints unrelated to social evaluative threat remain consistently low ($r < .20$).

Predictive and Clinical Validity

Longitudinal studies demonstrate that elevated pre-treatment SBS scores predict chronicity in major depressive disorder and social anxiety disorder. In clinical trials evaluating cognitive-behavioral and compassion-focused interventions, reductions in SBS scores mediate therapeutic recovery, tracking the transition from involuntary subordinate defense modes to cooperative and affiliative interpersonal styles (Gilbert et al., 2004).

Reliability

The Submissive Behaviour Scale possesses exceptional internal consistency and temporal stability across diverse clinical and non-clinical cohorts.

Internal Consistency

In the foundational validation studies by Gilbert, Allan, and Trent (1995) and Allan and Gilbert (1997), the 16-item scale demonstrated high internal consistency, yielding a Cronbach’s alpha of $\alpha = .89$ in an initial student population ($N = 107$) and $\alpha = .85$ in a clinical cohort presenting with major depressive episodes. Subsequent cross-cultural adaptations—including European, North American, and Asian translations—have consistently replicated internal consistency values ranging from $\alpha = .82$ to $.91$. Corrected item-total correlations across the 16 items generally exceed $.40$, indicating that each behavioral item shares meaningful variance with the underlying latent construct.

Test-Retest Stability

Temporal stability assessments reveal that the SBS captures an enduring behavioral pattern rather than a fleeting mood state. Gilbert et al. (1996) reported a four-month test-retest reliability coefficient of $r = .84$ ($p < .001$) in a non-clinical cohort. Over shorter intervals (e.g., two to four weeks), test-retest correlations consistently exceed $r = .88$. However, the instrument remains sensitive to systematic clinical improvement: when patients achieve remission from depression or complete targeted assertiveness/CFT interventions, submissive behavior scores decrease significantly, demonstrating both trait-like stability in the absence of treatment and responsiveness to therapeutic intervention.

Factor Analysis

Initial and subsequent psychometric investigations of the SBS have examined whether submissive behavior operates as a strictly unidimensional construct or encompasses distinct behavioral subtypes.

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

In the primary validation conducted by Allan and Gilbert (1997), principal components analysis (PCA) with varimax rotation revealed a dominant primary factor that accounted for the majority of the common variance (eigenvalue > 5.0, explaining approximately 35–40% of the total variance). While scree plots strongly supported a single overarching factor representing global submissiveness, secondary analyses in larger community and psychiatric samples have occasionally identified three interpretable sub-components:

1. Verbal Surrender / Conceding: Loaded heavily by items involving intellectual concession, failure to assert rights, and agreeing under pressure (e.g., Items 1, 3, 4, 6).
2. Appeasement and Placation: Defined by active, appeasing social gestures designed to maintain favor, such as excessive apologies and exaggerated thankfulness (e.g., Items 7, 12).
3. Inhibition and Gaze Avoidance: Encompassing physiological and expressive withdrawal markers, such as avoiding eye contact, blushing, and social avoidance (e.g., Items 11, 13, 14, 15).

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

Confirmatory factor analytical studies generally support a hierarchical bifactor model or a unidimensional model with correlated error terms between similarly worded behavioral items. Goodness-of-fit parameters reported in structural equation modeling studies (e.g., Gilbert et al., 2002; Irons & Gilbert, 2005) substantiate the unidimensional scoring approach:

• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): Ranging between .92 and .96.
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI): Ranging between .90 and .95.
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): Ranging between .045 and .068 (90% CI [.038, .075]).
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): Typically below .06.

Because the primary factor accounts for the vast majority of reliable variance, psychometricians and the original authors recommend computing a single composite score rather than calculating separate subscales, thereby ensuring maximum reliability and practical clinical utility.

Instrument / Measurement Tool

The Submissive Behaviour Scale is structured as an easy-to-administer, brief self-report questionnaire. Its formal technical specifications include:

• Instrument Type: Self-report behavioral frequency rating scale.
• Respondent Age Range: Adults (18+); adaptable for adolescents (14–17) with appropriate reading comprehension.
• Administration Time: Approximately 3 to 5 minutes.
• Number of Items: 16 items.
• Response Format: 5-point Likert-type scale reflecting behavioural frequency:
  • 0 = Never
  • 1 = Rarely
  • 2 = Sometimes
  • 3 = Mostly
  • 4 = Always
• Scoring Protocol: Continuous linear summation. All 16 items are phrased in the direction of submissive behavior; there are no reverse-coded items. The total raw score is calculated by summing the numerical ratings across all items:
  $$\text{Total Score} = \sum_{i=1}^{16} \text{Item}_i$$
• Score Range: 0 to 64. Higher total scores indicate a greater frequency of interpersonal submissive behavior and appeasement posturing.
• Normative Reference Values:
  • Non-clinical student/community samples: Mean scores typically range between 18.0 and 24.0 ($SD \approx 8.0 – 9.5$).
  • Clinical psychiatric samples (Depression / Anxiety): Mean scores typically range between 30.0 and 38.0 ($SD \approx 9.0 – 11.5$).
  • Scores > 32: Typically indicate clinically significant submissive and subordinate posturing warranting targeted therapeutic exploration.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Submissive Behaviour Scale was developed in 1994 by Paul Gilbert and Steven Allan, with its seminal validation published in 1997. The instrument is copyrighted by Steven Allan and Paul Gilbert (© Allan & Gilbert, 1997). In alignment with the authors’ dedication to advancing clinical research and mental health care, the scale is placed in the public domain for non-commercial academic research and clinical diagnostic practice.

No licensing fee or formal permission is required for clinicians or independent researchers to reproduce, administer, or score the instrument for educational, clinical, or non-commercial empirical purposes, provided appropriate scholarly attribution is maintained. Commercial applications, inclusion in copyrighted proprietary software platforms, or third-party paid diagnostic batteries require explicit formal authorization from the copyright holders.

References

• Allan, S., & Gilbert, P. (1997). Submissive behaviour and psychopathology. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 36(4), 467–488. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8260.1997.tb01255.x
• Buss, D. M., & Craik, K. H. (1986). The act frequency approach and the measurement of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(2), 393–404. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.2.393
• Gilbert, P. (1989). Human Nature and Suffering. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Gilbert, P. (1992). Depression: The Evolution of Powerlessness. Guilford Press.
• Gilbert, P. (1997). The evolution of social attractiveness and its role in shame, humiliation, guilt and pride. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 70(2), 113–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8341.1997.tb01893.x
• Gilbert, P. (2000). The relationship of shame, social anxiety and depression: The role of the evaluation of social rank. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 7(3), 174–189. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-0879(200007)7:3<174::AID-CPP236>3.0.CO;2-U
• Gilbert, P., & Allan, S. (1994). Assertiveness, submissive behaviour and social comparison. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 33(3), 295–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8260.1994.tb01125.x
• Gilbert, P., Allan, S., & Trent, D. R. (1995). Involuntary subordination or dependency as key dimensions of depressive vulnerability? Journal of Clinical Psychology, 51(6), 740–752. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4679(199511)51:6<740::AID-JCLP2270510604>3.0.CO;2-9
• Gilbert, P., Allan, S., Brough, S., Melley, S., & Miles, J. N. (2002). An exploration of social rank, submissive behaviour and entrapment in unipolar and bipolar depression. Journal of Affective Disorders, 68(2–3), 261–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0327(00)00343-4
• Gilbert, P., Clarke, M., Hempel, S., Miles, J. N., & Irons, C. (2004). Criticizing and reassuring oneself: An exploration of forms, styles and reasons in female students. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 43(1), 31–50. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466504772812959
• Irons, C., & Gilbert, P. (2005). Evolved mechanisms in adolescent anxiety and depression symptoms: The role of the attachment and social rank systems. Journal of Adolescence, 28(3), 325–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2004.07.004
• Price, J., Sloman, L., Gardner, R., Gilbert, P., & Rohde, P. (1994). The social rank theory of depression. British Journal of Psychiatry, 164(3), 309–315. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.164.3.309

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)