Effectiveness of an AI-Integrated Proactive Thought Control Intervention for Young Adults With Social Anxiety Disorder
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.
1 other identifier
interventional
75
1 country
1
Brief Summary
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.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable
Started Mar 2026
Shorter than P25 for not_applicable
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
March 14, 2026
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
August 12, 2026
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
August 14, 2026
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
August 29, 2026
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
September 9, 2026
CompletedSeptember 9, 2026
September 1, 2026
5 months
August 29, 2026
September 3, 2026
Conditions
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (5)
Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale-Self Report
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)
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
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
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
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
Secondary Outcomes (1)
beck depression inventory II
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
Study Arms (3)
proactive thought control
EXPERIMENTALThe 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).
Cognitive Behavior Therapy
ACTIVE COMPARATORThe 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.
Active Control Group
ACTIVE COMPARATORThe 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.
Interventions
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)
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.
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.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- 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.
You may not qualify if:
- 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.
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
- Farah Shahzadilead
Study Sites (1)
Farah Shahzadi
Gujranwala, Punjab Province, Pakistan
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Interventions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Principal Investigator
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
August 29, 2026
First Posted
September 9, 2026
Study Start
March 14, 2026
Primary Completion
August 12, 2026
Study Completion
August 14, 2026
Last Updated
September 9, 2026
Record last verified: 2026-09