Neural Mechanisms of Social Feedback Evaluation in Young Adults Across the Schizotypy Spectrum: An EEG Social Judgment Study
Neural Mechanisms of Social Feedback Evaluation in Schizotypy: An EEG Study of Oscillatory and Event-Related Potentials
This study will examine how young adults with different levels of schizotypal traits process social acceptance and rejection. Participants between 18 and 35 years old will complete a single laboratory session that includes questionnaires and electroencephalography (EEG), a noninvasive method that measures electrical brain activity through sensors placed on the scalp. During EEG recording, participants will complete a computer-based Social Judgment Paradigm (SJP) in which they form expectations about whether another person will like or dislike them and then receive experimentally controlled acceptance or rejection feedback. The study will examine how brain responses differ when social feedback is expected versus unexpected and whether these responses vary with schizotypal traits. The goal is to better understand the brain mechanisms involved in evaluating social feedback. This study does not provide treatment and does not test a drug or medical device.
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Schizotypal traits occur along a continuum in the general population and are associated with differences in social functioning and social information processing. This study will investigate neural responses to social feedback in young adults across the schizotypy spectrum using electroencephalography (EEG).
Participants between 18 and 35 years old will complete a single experimental session. During EEG recording, they will perform a Social Judgment Paradigm (SJP) in which they first form an expectation about whether another person will respond positively or negatively toward them and subsequently receive acceptance or rejection feedback. This produces four within-participant feedback conditions: expected acceptance, expected rejection, unexpected acceptance, and unexpected rejection.
The study will examine brain activity associated with evaluating social feedback, including frontal-midline (FM) theta activity and event-related potentials (ERPs). The primary analyses will test whether neural responses to acceptance and rejection, particularly when feedback violates expectations, vary as a function of continuous schizotypal traits. Participants will also complete self-report measures assessing schizotypal traits, social functioning, and related psychological characteristics.
The study is designed to clarify neural mechanisms involved in social feedback evaluation and to determine how individual differences in schizotypal traits are associated with these processes.
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
Study Contact
- Name: Silvia Corbera LOpez Principal Investigator, PhD.
- Phone Number: 860-832-3111
- Email: silviac@ccsu.edu
Study Contact Backup
- Name: Brenda Lopez Grants and Funded Research Administrator
- Phone Number: (860) 832-2366
- Email: b.lopez@ccsu.edu
Study Locations
-
-
Connecticut
-
New Britain, Connecticut, United States, 06050
- Central Connecticut State University
-
Contact:
- Silvia Corbera Lopez, Principal Investigator, Ph.D.
- Phone Number: 860-832-3111
- Email: silviac@ccsu.edu
-
Contact:
- Brenda Lopez Grants and Funded Research Administrator
- Phone Number: 860.832.2366
- Email: b.lopez@ccsu.edu
-
Principal Investigator:
- Silvia Corbera Lopez, Ph.D.
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Ages 18-35 years.
- Able to provide informed consent.
- Able to complete an EEG recording session.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Younger than 18 years or older than 35 years.
- Unable to provide informed consent.
- Unable to complete the EEG recording session.
- No additional exclusion criteria are applied.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Basic Science
- Allocation: N/A
- Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Social Judgment Paradigm
Participants complete a single-session Social Judgment Paradigm during EEG recording. All participants experience four within-subject experimental conditions defined by feedback expectancy (expected versus unexpected) and feedback valence (acceptance versus rejection): expected acceptance, expected rejection, unexpected acceptance, and unexpected rejection. The order of feedback trials is randomized within the task. |
A computerized Social Judgment Paradigm in which participants receive experimentally controlled social feedback (acceptance/rejection) from purported peers or evaluators while continuous EEG is recorded to assess oscillatory activity and event-related potentials associated with social feedback processing. Feedback valence and expectancy are manipulated at the trial level, with trial order randomized within the task.
Other Names:
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Frontal Midline Theta Power (4-7 Hz)
Time Frame: Day 1
|
Mean frontal-midline theta-band power (4-7 Hz) derived from EEG data time-locked to feedback onset during the Social Judgment Paradigm, quantified during the prespecified 200-600 ms post-feedback window at frontocentral electrodes. Theta power will be measured directly across the four feedback conditions defined by expectancy (expected/unexpected) and feedback valence (acceptance/rejection). |
Day 1
|
|
Feedback-Related Negativity (FRN) Amplitude
Time Frame: Day 1
|
Mean event-related potential (ERP) amplitude within the 250-350 ms time window following feedback onset during the Social Judgment Paradigm, quantified at frontocentral electrodes. FRN amplitude will be measured directly across the four feedback conditions defined by expectancy and feedback valence. |
Day 1
|
|
Late Positive Potential (LPP) Amplitude
Time Frame: Day 1
|
Mean event-related potential (ERP) amplitude within the 350-600 ms time window following feedback onset during the Social Judgment Paradigm, quantified at midline electrodes. LPP amplitude will be measured directly across the four feedback conditions defined by expectancy and feedback valence. |
Day 1
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Behavioral Expectancy Responses
Time Frame: Day 1
|
Participant predictions of social acceptance or rejection during each trial of the Social Judgment Paradigm, including expectancy response and reaction time. |
Day 1
|
|
Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire (SPQ) Total Score
Time Frame: Day 1
|
The Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire (SPQ) is a 74-item self-report measure assessing schizotypal personality traits across cognitive-perceptual, interpersonal, and disorganized dimensions. Items are answered in a yes/no format and scored dichotomously. Item scores are summed to produce a total score ranging from 0 to 74. Higher scores indicate greater levels of schizotypal personality traits. |
Day 1
|
|
Multidimensional Schizotypy Scale (MSS) Scores
Time Frame: Day 1
|
The Multidimensional Schizotypy Scale (MSS) is a 77-item self-report measure assessing positive, negative, and disorganized dimensions of schizotypy. Items are answered using a true/false response format. The Positive Schizotypy subscale contains 26 items and ranges from 0 to 26; the Negative Schizotypy subscale contains 26 items and ranges from 0 to 26; and the Disorganized Schizotypy subscale contains 25 items and ranges from 0 to 25. Higher scores on each subscale indicate greater levels of the corresponding dimension of schizotypy. |
Day 1
|
|
Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale-Revised (BFNES-R) Total Score
Time Frame: Day 1
|
The Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale-Revised (BFNES-R) is a 12-item self-report measure assessing fear of negative evaluation by others. Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all characteristic of me) to 4 (extremely characteristic of me). Item ratings are summed to produce a total score ranging from 0 to 48. Higher scores indicate greater fear of negative evaluation and greater concern about others' social evaluation. |
Day 1
|
|
Perceived Stress Reactivity Scale (PSRS) Total Score
Time Frame: Day 1
|
The Perceived Stress Reactivity Scale (PSRS) is a 23-item self-report measure assessing an individual's typical response intensity to potentially stressful situations in everyday life. The scale includes five domains: prolonged reactivity, reactivity to failure, reactivity to social conflict, reactivity to work overload, and reactivity to social evaluation. Items are scored from 0 to 2, with negatively keyed items reverse-scored, and summed to produce a total score ranging from 0 to 46. Higher scores indicate greater perceived stress reactivity |
Day 1
|
|
Social Functioning Questionnaire (SFQ) Total Score
Time Frame: Day 1
|
The Social Functioning Questionnaire (SFQ) is an 8-item self-report measure assessing perceived social functioning across domains including work and home activities, finances, close relationships, family relationships, social isolation, sexual functioning, and leisure activities. Each item is scored from 0 to 3, and item scores are summed to produce a total score ranging from 0 to 24. Higher scores indicate poorer social functioning. |
Day 1
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Somerville LH, Heatherton TF, Kelley WM. Anterior cingulate cortex responds differentially to expectancy violation and social rejection. Nat Neurosci. 2006 Aug;9(8):1007-8. doi: 10.1038/nn1728. Epub 2006 Jul 2.
- van der Molen MJW, Dekkers LMS, Westenberg PM, van der Veen FM, van der Molen MW. Why don't you like me? Midfrontal theta power in response to unexpected peer rejection feedback. Neuroimage. 2017 Feb 1;146:474-483. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.08.045. Epub 2016 Aug 23.
- Kortink ED, Weeda WD, Crowley MJ, Gunther Moor B, van der Molen MJW. Community structure analysis of rejection sensitive personality profiles: A common neural response to social evaluative threat? Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2018 Jun;18(3):581-595. doi: 10.3758/s13415-018-0589-1.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Estimated)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- CORBERA-R15-SJP-2026
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
IPD Plan Description
De-identified individual participant data will be shared through the NIMH Data Archive (NDA). Shared data will include demographic, behavioral, clinical/phenotypic, and questionnaire data; expectancy ratings and trial-level responses from the Social Judgment Paradigm; raw 64-channel EEG data; and processed EEG derivatives underlying project findings, including ERP and time-frequency measures. Direct identifiers will not be shared.
IPD Sharing Time Frame
Data underlying peer-reviewed publications will be shared by the time of publication. Other study data, including unpublished data, will be shared no later than the end of the period of performance, including any no-cost extensions.
IPD Sharing Access Criteria
Individual participant data will be available through the NIMH Data Archive (NDA) in accordance with NDA data access policies and procedures. Access to participant-level data will be governed by NDA requirements designed to protect participants' privacy, rights, and confidentiality. Direct identifiers will not be shared.
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.