Effectiveness of an AI-Integrated Proactive Thought Control Intervention for Young Adults With Social Anxiety Disorder
2026年9月3日 更新者：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.
調査の概要
状態
完了
条件
研究の種類
介入
入学 (実際)
75
段階
- 適用できない
連絡先と場所
このセクションには、調査を実施する担当者の連絡先の詳細と、この調査が実施されている場所に関する情報が記載されています。
研究場所
-
-
Punjab Province
-
Gujranwala、Punjab Province、パキスタン
- Farah Shahzadi
-
-
参加基準
研究者は、適格基準と呼ばれる特定の説明に適合する人を探します。これらの基準のいくつかの例は、人の一般的な健康状態または以前の治療です。
適格基準
就学可能な年齢
- 大人
健康ボランティアの受け入れ
いいえ
説明
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.
研究計画
このセクションでは、研究がどのように設計され、研究が何を測定しているかなど、研究計画の詳細を提供します。
研究はどのように設計されていますか？
デザインの詳細
- 主な目的：処理
- 割り当て：ランダム化
- 介入モデル：並列代入
- マスキング：独身
武器と介入
参加者グループ / アーム |
介入・治療 |
|---|---|
|
実験的：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.
|
|
アクティブコンパレータ：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)
|
|
アクティブコンパレータ：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.
|
この研究は何を測定していますか？
主要な結果の測定
結果測定 |
メジャーの説明 |
時間枠 |
|---|---|---|
|
Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale-Self Report
時間枠：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)
時間枠：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
時間枠：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
時間枠：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
時間枠：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
|
二次結果の測定
結果測定 |
メジャーの説明 |
時間枠 |
|---|---|---|
|
beck depression inventory II
時間枠：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
|
協力者と研究者
ここでは、この調査に関係する人々や組織を見つけることができます。
スポンサー
研究記録日
これらの日付は、ClinicalTrials.gov への研究記録と要約結果の提出の進捗状況を追跡します。研究記録と報告された結果は、国立医学図書館 (NLM) によって審査され、公開 Web サイトに掲載される前に、特定の品質管理基準を満たしていることが確認されます。
主要日程の研究
研究開始 (実際)
2026年3月14日
一次修了 (実際)
2026年8月12日
研究の完了 (実際)
2026年8月14日
試験登録日
最初に提出
2026年8月29日
QC基準を満たした最初の提出物
2026年9月3日
最初の投稿 (実際)
2026年9月9日
学習記録の更新
投稿された最後の更新 (実際)
2026年9月9日
QC基準を満たした最後の更新が送信されました
2026年9月3日
最終確認日
2026年9月1日
詳しくは
この情報は、Web サイト clinicaltrials.gov から変更なしで直接取得したものです。研究の詳細を変更、削除、または更新するリクエストがある場合は、register@clinicaltrials.gov。 までご連絡ください。 clinicaltrials.gov に変更が加えられるとすぐに、ウェブサイトでも自動的に更新されます。