Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
76 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2016-04-10
2019-12-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Multi-session, Personalized Cognitive Bias Modification for Thought-Action-Fusion
NCT06731426
Information Processing Modification in PTSD (Oct. 18)
NCT00601952
Computerized Cognitive Bias Intervention for Intolerance of Uncertainty
NCT02818296
Neurobiology of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Dysfunction and Recovery Following Cognitive Processing Therapy
NCT02695953
Prevention of PTSD III: Neurocognitive Training of Emotional Regulation
NCT02085512
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
TAF Incongruent (TAF-INC)
Active condition (TAF-INC) cognitive bias modification for interpretations (CBM-I), incorporates an obsessional thought meant to elicit either moral or likelihood TAF, followed by a sentence incongruent to TAF bias and meant to reduce the impact of the previous statement. Before moving on, participants must fill-in and correctly solve a key word important in the interpretation of the sentence. Participants then must correctly solve a short yes/no comprehension question to ensure understanding of the scenario.
Cognitive Bias Modification
There is support that CBM-I may work through the process of cognitive restructuring, and specifically, threat reappraisal. Threat appraisal is a tendency to overestimate the likelihood of harm (i.e., likelihood bias) and/or the negative consequences of anticipated harm (i.e., Clark \& Beck, 2010), producing avoidance, thus interfering with effectively reappraising threat, thereby creating a vicious cycle (Beck et al., 1985; Clark \& Beck, 2010). CBM-I procedures ensure that an interpretation bias is triggered by the ambiguous scenarios, and participants are then guided to solve the key word in accordance with a healthy response (Grey \& Mathews, 2000). The observed effects of CBM-I may stem from active generation of benign or positive meanings in response to ambiguous situations, where threats were previously interpreted (Beadel et al., 2014).
TAF Congruent (TAF-CON)
Maintenance/Control condition (TAF-CON) CBM-I, differs in that participants are provided with a sentence congruent with TAF bias. Again, participants were only able to move on when they correctly solved the key word and the accompanying yes/no comprehension question.
Cognitive Bias Modification
There is support that CBM-I may work through the process of cognitive restructuring, and specifically, threat reappraisal. Threat appraisal is a tendency to overestimate the likelihood of harm (i.e., likelihood bias) and/or the negative consequences of anticipated harm (i.e., Clark \& Beck, 2010), producing avoidance, thus interfering with effectively reappraising threat, thereby creating a vicious cycle (Beck et al., 1985; Clark \& Beck, 2010). CBM-I procedures ensure that an interpretation bias is triggered by the ambiguous scenarios, and participants are then guided to solve the key word in accordance with a healthy response (Grey \& Mathews, 2000). The observed effects of CBM-I may stem from active generation of benign or positive meanings in response to ambiguous situations, where threats were previously interpreted (Beadel et al., 2014).
Stress Management Psychoeducation
In the stress management psychoeducation (SMP) psychoeducation about stress and stress management are provided, similar in length to the obsessional thought and interpretations presented in the TAF-INC and TAF-CON. Like the other conditions there is a key word to solve, and participants were only able to move on when they correctly solved the key word and the accompanying yes/no comprehension question.
Cognitive Bias Modification
There is support that CBM-I may work through the process of cognitive restructuring, and specifically, threat reappraisal. Threat appraisal is a tendency to overestimate the likelihood of harm (i.e., likelihood bias) and/or the negative consequences of anticipated harm (i.e., Clark \& Beck, 2010), producing avoidance, thus interfering with effectively reappraising threat, thereby creating a vicious cycle (Beck et al., 1985; Clark \& Beck, 2010). CBM-I procedures ensure that an interpretation bias is triggered by the ambiguous scenarios, and participants are then guided to solve the key word in accordance with a healthy response (Grey \& Mathews, 2000). The observed effects of CBM-I may stem from active generation of benign or positive meanings in response to ambiguous situations, where threats were previously interpreted (Beadel et al., 2014).
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Cognitive Bias Modification
There is support that CBM-I may work through the process of cognitive restructuring, and specifically, threat reappraisal. Threat appraisal is a tendency to overestimate the likelihood of harm (i.e., likelihood bias) and/or the negative consequences of anticipated harm (i.e., Clark \& Beck, 2010), producing avoidance, thus interfering with effectively reappraising threat, thereby creating a vicious cycle (Beck et al., 1985; Clark \& Beck, 2010). CBM-I procedures ensure that an interpretation bias is triggered by the ambiguous scenarios, and participants are then guided to solve the key word in accordance with a healthy response (Grey \& Mathews, 2000). The observed effects of CBM-I may stem from active generation of benign or positive meanings in response to ambiguous situations, where threats were previously interpreted (Beadel et al., 2014).
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
18 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Han Joo Lee
Associate Professor
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Stephan Siwiec, M.S.
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
UWM Anxiety Disorders Laboratory
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Related Links
Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.
UWM Anxiety Disorders Lab Website
UWM SONA Portal to Prescreen Information
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
TAF Extended
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.