Emotional Perceptual Training as a Treatment for Social Anxiety: Behavioral and Neural Evidence.

NCT ID: NCT03437317

Last Updated: 2018-02-19

Basic Information

• Recruitment Status: COMPLETED
• Clinical Phase: NA
• Total Enrollment: 154 participants
• Study Classification: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Start Date: 2014-11-01
• Study Completion Date: 2016-12-15

Brief Summary

The Perceptual Training Study is a series of studies performed with the purpose of identifying a potential avenue for treatment of mood disorders, particularly anxiety-based mood disorders. The underlying theme is that neural representations may be threat-oriented, and may also be generalized to non-threatening cues by means of similarity to threatening representations. These may result in anxiety symptoms from innocuous cues. The idea behind the perceptual training is to create a divorce between the threat representations and cues which should be considered non-threatening, enhancing perceptual acuity and potentially reducing anxiety symptoms.

Conditions

Anxiety Disorders and Symptoms; Social Anxiety Disorder

Study Design

• Allocation Method: RANDOMIZED
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Primary Study Purpose: TREATMENT
• Blinding Strategy: SINGLE

Study Groups

Active - MEG

Participants completed 1 session of 8 Perceptual Retraining blocks following an instructional presentation.

Group Type: EXPERIMENTAL

Perceptual Retraining

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Participants viewed faces varying in their expression of anger and were asked to identify if the face was angry or neutral via button press. Participants were provided with feedback if their categorization of the face as neutral or angry was correct. Each participant was assigned 4 levels of angry faces based on their decision point of anger detection in faces. Faces were selected based on the closest existing anger morph to the category boundary; for example, a decision point of 40% anger was closest to the 38% anger face, and so the faces used would have been 17%, 31%, 45%, and 59% anger. For this example, responses of "neutral" to the 31% angry face would be marked as correct, whereas a similar response to the 45% angry face would be incorrect, as it was above their decision point.

Control - MEG

Participants completed 1 session of 8 blocks of Gender Discrimination Task.

Group Type: SHAM_COMPARATOR

Gender Discrimination

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Participants viewed faces varying in their expression of anger and were asked to identify if the face was male or female via button press.

Active - 3 Behavior/EEG

Participants completed 3 sessions of Perceptual Retraining following an instructional presentation. The first session included 6 blocks of perceptual training, and the second session included 12 blocks of perceptual training. No perceptual training was performed in session 3. Sessions were spaced approximately 7 days apart, with a minimum of 3 days and a maximum of 14 days apart.

Group Type: EXPERIMENTAL

Perceptual Retraining

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Participants viewed faces varying in their expression of anger and were asked to identify if the face was angry or neutral via button press. Participants were provided with feedback if their categorization of the face as neutral or angry was correct. Each participant was assigned 4 levels of angry faces based on their decision point of anger detection in faces. Faces were selected based on the closest existing anger morph to the category boundary; for example, a decision point of 40% anger was closest to the 38% anger face, and so the faces used would have been 17%, 31%, 45%, and 59% anger. For this example, responses of "neutral" to the 31% angry face would be marked as correct, whereas a similar response to the 45% angry face would be incorrect, as it was above their decision point.

Active - 1 Behavior/MEG

Participants completed 1 session of 6 Perceptual Retraining blocks following an instructional presentation.

Group Type: EXPERIMENTAL

Perceptual Retraining

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Participants viewed faces varying in their expression of anger and were asked to identify if the face was angry or neutral via button press. Participants were provided with feedback if their categorization of the face as neutral or angry was correct. Each participant was assigned 4 levels of angry faces based on their decision point of anger detection in faces. Faces were selected based on the closest existing anger morph to the category boundary; for example, a decision point of 40% anger was closest to the 38% anger face, and so the faces used would have been 17%, 31%, 45%, and 59% anger. For this example, responses of "neutral" to the 31% angry face would be marked as correct, whereas a similar response to the 45% angry face would be incorrect, as it was above their decision point.

Control - 3 Behavior/MEG

Participants completed 3 sessions of a Gender Discrimination Task. The first session included 6 blocks of gender discrimination task, and the second session included 12 blocks of the gender discrimination task. No gender discrimination task was performed in session 3. Sessions were spaced approximately 7 days apart, with a minimum of 3 days and a maximum of 14 days apart.

Group Type: SHAM_COMPARATOR

Gender Discrimination

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Participants viewed faces varying in their expression of anger and were asked to identify if the face was male or female via button press.

Interventions

Perceptual Retraining

Participants viewed faces varying in their expression of anger and were asked to identify if the face was angry or neutral via button press. Participants were provided with feedback if their categorization of the face as neutral or angry was correct. Each participant was assigned 4 levels of angry faces based on their decision point of anger detection in faces. Faces were selected based on the closest existing anger morph to the category boundary; for example, a decision point of 40% anger was closest to the 38% anger face, and so the faces used would have been 17%, 31%, 45%, and 59% anger. For this example, responses of "neutral" to the 31% angry face would be marked as correct, whereas a similar response to the 45% angry face would be incorrect, as it was above their decision point.

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Gender Discrimination

Participants viewed faces varying in their expression of anger and were asked to identify if the face was male or female via button press.

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

• Right-handed
• Normal or corrected-to-normal vision

Exclusion Criteria

• History of a diagnosed neurological or Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders - IV Axis I disorder
• Currently taking prescribed psychoactive drugs, including anti-depressants or anxiolytics.
• Having electrically, magnetically, or mechanically activated implants (e.g. cardiac pacemakers), due to incompatibility with MRI and MEG systems.
• Pregnancy or suspected pregnancy

• Minimum Eligible Age: 18 Years
• Maximum Eligible Age: 35 Years
• Eligible Sex: ALL
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes

Sponsors

Medical College of Wisconsin

OTHER

Sponsor Role: collaborator

Florida State University

OTHER

Sponsor Role: lead

Responsible Party

Wen Li

Dr. Wen Li, Associate Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience

Responsibility Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Other Identifiers

PTL-2017.21521

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id