Effectiveness of an AI-Integrated Proactive Thought Control Intervention for Young Adults With Social Anxiety Disorder
torstai 3. syyskuuta 2026 päivittänyt: Farah Shahzadi
The Objective is to Examine the Effectiveness of Ai Integrated Proactive Thought Control for Social Anxiety Disorder and Compare Its Effectiveness With Active Control Group and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Participants With SAD Will be Recruited From Educational Setting, Will Get 8 Therapy Sessions.
Participants with Social Anxiety Disorder will be recruited from educational settings .
After screening and informed consent, participants will be randomly assigned to PTC , ACG or CBT .The therapy session will be 8 session once a week, and data will be collected through psychological questionnaires in two phases at start and end of intervention.
Tutkimuksen yleiskatsaus
Tila
Valmis
Interventio / Hoito
Opintotyyppi
Interventio
Ilmoittautuminen (Todellinen)
75
Vaihe
- Ei sovellettavissa
Yhteystiedot ja paikat
Tässä osiossa on tutkimuksen suorittajien yhteystiedot ja tiedot siitä, missä tämä tutkimus suoritetaan.
Opiskelupaikat
-
-
Punjab Province
-
Gujranwala, Punjab Province, Pakistan
- Farah Shahzadi
-
-
Osallistumiskriteerit
Tutkijat etsivät ihmisiä, jotka sopivat tiettyyn kuvaukseen, jota kutsutaan kelpoisuuskriteereiksi. Joitakin esimerkkejä näistä kriteereistä ovat henkilön yleinen terveydentila tai aiemmat hoidot.
Kelpoisuusvaatimukset
Opintokelpoiset iät
- Aikuinen
Hyväksyy terveitä vapaaehtoisia
Ei
Kuvaus
Inclusion Criteria:
- Were between 18 and 26 years of age, corresponding to the developmental period of emerging adulthood (Arnett, 2000).
- Met DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for Social Anxiety Disorder on the SCID-5-RV (First et al., 2015).
- Scored at or above the clinical cutoff of 30 on the LSAS-SR, indicating clinically significant social anxiety (Mennin et al., 2002).
- Were not receiving any other form of psychological intervention at the time of the study.
- Had sufficient English proficiency to understand instructions and complete the assessments (Flores, 2006).
- Provided written informed consent.
- Possessed basic computer literacy and typing skills required for the digital tasks.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Were younger than 18 or older than 26 years.
- Did not meet DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for Social Anxiety Disorder on the SCID-5-RV.
- Scored in the clinically significant range for general anxiety (BAI ≥ 16; Beck et al., 1988) or at or above the threshold for moderate depression (BDI-II ≥ 20; Beck et al., 1996).
- Were currently receiving psychological treatment for any psychiatric condition.
- Had a lifetime history of a severe psychiatric disorder other than Social Anxiety Disorder (e.g., psychosis, bipolar disorder).
- Had a medical or neurological condition that could interfere with task completion or valid responding.
- Were unable to complete the study procedures or assessments.
- Had no prior experience using a computer.
Opintosuunnitelma
Tässä osiossa on tietoja tutkimussuunnitelmasta, mukaan lukien kuinka tutkimus on suunniteltu ja mitä tutkimuksella mitataan.
Miten tutkimus on suunniteltu?
Suunnittelun yksityiskohdat
- Ensisijainen käyttötarkoitus: Hoito
- Jako: Satunnaistettu
- Inventiomalli: Rinnakkaistehtävä
- Naamiointi: Yksittäinen
Aseet ja interventiot
Osallistujaryhmä / Arm |
Interventio / Hoito |
|---|---|
|
Kokeellinen: proactive thought control
The PTC (Proactive Thought Control) arm an AI-integrated, computerized intervention that trains proactive thought control, the anticipatory maintenance of a positive goal representation used to override an automatically primed negative response before it is produced (Braver, 2012).
Across eight sessions, each pairing a Free Association Task (single-word cues) with a Sentence Completion Task (unfinished social-evaluative stems).
|
The two paired tasks Free Association Task (FAT) and Sentence Completion Task (SCT) form the core of the AI-integrated Proactive Thought Control (PTC) program.
FAT shows a social-threat word and the participant types the first associated word, training proactive control at the lexical level; SCT then gives unfinished social-evaluative stems to complete with a benign word, extending the override to the propositional level.
Both run three blocks of thirty self-paced trials per session (720 over two weeks), so every threat trial forces a positive, cue-relevant representation that overrides a primed negative associate before advancing.
AI integration relies on real-time validation: SiEBERT scores sentiment and MiniLM embedding confirm semantic relevance, enforcing a positive, cue-relevant construal each trial.
Feedback reinforces this accepted responses earn points, rejected one prompt revision, and the threshold relaxes after four failures and pass after eight.
|
|
Active Comparator: Cognitive Behavior Therapy
The CBT group served as the gold-standard comparison condition, receiving an eight-session, individually delivered cognitive-behavioral protocol adapted from the empirically supported treatment of Hope, Heimberg, and Turk (2019).
To fit the study's fixed eight-session frame, it followed the manual's accelerated outline, compressing the standard sixteen-to-twenty-session course while still covering most relevant workbook chapters in order.
|
8-session CBT protocol ( Hope, Heimberg & Turk, 2019 manual) The CBT arm received an eight-session protocol moving from psychoeducation and the three-component model of social anxiety with an individualized Fear and Avoidance Hierarchy (Sessions 1-2), through cognitive restructuring using disputing questions from automatic thought to rational response (Sessions 3-4), to repeated graded exposure using role-plays, distress ratings, and added cognitive tools, with the final session offering core-belief work and setting post-treatment maintenance goals (Sessions 5-8)
|
|
Active Comparator: Active Control Group
The Active Control group was a structurally and temporally matched, computerized active comparison condition that removed the intervention's active ingredient while preserving every non-specific feature.
Participants completed the same two tasks (Free Association and Sentence Completion), the same cue/stem material, same three blocks of 30 trials per session (720 across eight sessions), same self-paced presentation, practice trials, on-screen appearance, and time on task, so the two conditions were equated on stimuli, dose, feedback salience, and engagement.
The key difference was the omission of the proactive-thought-control contingency.
|
Participants did the same two tasks as the experimental group.
The Free Association Task and the Sentence Completion Task , matched on stimuli, format, and time.
The key difference was that the control removed the core training element: responses were not checked for meaning against the cue, and about half of the negative answers were accepted without correction, so the link between a threat cue and forcing a positive response was broken.
In short, the control group did the same tasks and got the same exposure, but without the active thinking-training component.
|
Mitä tutkimuksessa mitataan?
Ensisijaiset tulostoimenpiteet
Tulosmittaus |
Toimenpiteen kuvaus |
Aikaikkuna |
|---|---|---|
|
Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale-Self Report
Aikaikkuna: Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
|
Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale-Self-Report; range 0-144; higher = worse (greater social anxiety severity)
|
Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
|
|
Core Belief Questionnaire (CBQ)
Aikaikkuna: Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
|
Core Belief Questionnaire-Self-Trait and -Other (17 items each, 6-point Likert); range 17-102 if items are scored 1-6; higher = more strongly endorsed negative core beliefs (worse)".
|
Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
|
|
Dot Probe task
Aikaikkuna: Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
|
milliseconds; more positive = stronger bias toward social threat
|
Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
|
|
word sentence association paradigm
Aikaikkuna: Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
|
higher = more threat-relevant interpretation bias
|
Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
|
|
Behavioral Avoidance Task
Aikaikkuna: Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
|
SUDS 0-100; higher = more subjective distress
|
Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
|
Toissijaiset tulostoimenpiteet
Tulosmittaus |
Toimenpiteen kuvaus |
Aikaikkuna |
|---|---|---|
|
beck depression inventory II
Aikaikkuna: Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
|
range 0-63; higher = worse
|
Baseline (Day 1, before the first session) and Post-Intervention (within 7 days after the eighth session; the 8 sessions are delivered a weekly over a 8-week period
|
Yhteistyökumppanit ja tutkijat
Täältä löydät tähän tutkimukseen osallistuvat ihmiset ja organisaatiot.
Sponsori
Opintojen ennätyspäivät
Nämä päivämäärät seuraavat ClinicalTrials.gov-sivustolle lähetettyjen tutkimustietueiden ja yhteenvetojen edistymistä. National Library of Medicine (NLM) tarkistaa tutkimustiedot ja raportoidut tulokset varmistaakseen, että ne täyttävät tietyt laadunvalvontastandardit, ennen kuin ne julkaistaan julkisella verkkosivustolla.
Opi tärkeimmät päivämäärät
Opiskelun aloitus (Todellinen)
Lauantai 14. maaliskuuta 2026
Ensisijainen valmistuminen (Todellinen)
Keskiviikko 12. elokuuta 2026
Opintojen valmistuminen (Todellinen)
Perjantai 14. elokuuta 2026
Opintoihin ilmoittautumispäivät
Ensimmäinen lähetetty
Lauantai 29. elokuuta 2026
Ensimmäinen toimitettu, joka täytti QC-kriteerit
Torstai 3. syyskuuta 2026
Ensimmäinen Lähetetty (Todellinen)
Keskiviikko 9. syyskuuta 2026
Tutkimustietojen päivitykset
Viimeisin päivitys julkaistu (Todellinen)
Keskiviikko 9. syyskuuta 2026
Viimeisin lähetetty päivitys, joka täytti QC-kriteerit
Torstai 3. syyskuuta 2026
Viimeksi vahvistettu
Tiistai 1. syyskuuta 2026
Lisää tietoa
Tähän tutkimukseen liittyvät termit
Muita asiaankuuluvia MeSH-ehtoja
Muut tutkimustunnusnumerot
- GIFT/PSY/MS/2025/004
Yksittäisten osallistujien tietojen suunnitelma (IPD)
Aiotko jakaa yksittäisten osallistujien tietoja (IPD)?
PÄÄTTÄMÄTÖN
Lääke- ja laitetiedot, tutkimusasiakirjat
Tutkii yhdysvaltalaista FDA sääntelemää lääkevalmistetta
Ei
Tutkii yhdysvaltalaista FDA sääntelemää laitetuotetta
Ei
Nämä tiedot haettiin suoraan verkkosivustolta clinicaltrials.gov ilman muutoksia. Jos sinulla on pyyntöjä muuttaa, poistaa tai päivittää tutkimustietojasi, ota yhteyttä register@clinicaltrials.gov. Heti kun muutos on otettu käyttöön osoitteessa clinicaltrials.gov, se päivitetään automaattisesti myös verkkosivustollemme .