Schäfer Leonora Nina, Rief Winfried
Department for Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Philipps University Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Front Psychol. 2025 Jan 10;15:1502460. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1502460. eCollection 2024.
Several studies identified affect-regulatory qualities of deceptive placebos within negative and positive affect. However, which specific characteristics of an affect-regulatory framing impacts the placebo effect has not yet been subject to empirical investigations. In particular, it is unclear whether placebo- induced expectations of direct emotion inhibition or emotion regulation after emotion induction elicit stronger effects in affect regulation.
The aim of the study was to identify whether specifically framed expectations on the occurrence (antecedent-focused) vs. regulation capability (response-modulating) of affect, induced with an active placebo nasal-spray, have effects on affect-regulatory processes. Because personality traits have been suspected to influence placebo responses and affect regulation, an additional goal of the study was to examine modulating influences of shame proneness, level of depression, experiential avoidance, and emotional control.
Healthy volunteers ( = 121) were randomized to either a deceptive placebo condition (antecedent-focused vs. response-modulating instruction) or a no-treatment control group before shame was experimentally induced via autobiographical recall. Groups were compared on outcomes of state shame, rumination, and cognitive flexibility.
Both antecedent-focused and response-modulating placebo framings influenced changes in state shame ( = 3.08, 95% CI = [0.80-5.92], = 0.044), rumination ( = 4.80, 95% CI = [1.50-8.09], ≤ 0.001) and cognitive flexibility outcomes ( = -3.63, 95% CI = [-6.75 - -0.51], = 0.011) after shame-induction interventions. Only the antecedent-focused placebo response was modulated by personality traits. Experiential avoidance modulated shame experience ((2,115) = 3.470, = 0.031) whereas emotional control influenced the reports of state rumination ((2,115) = 4.588, = 0.012). No modulatory influences of levels of depression and shame proneness could be observed ( > 0.05).
The results suggest that shame, rumination and cognitive flexibility can be positively influenced by placebo treatment in healthy subjects. Personality traits of emotional control and experiential avoidance influenced the placebo response of the antecedent-focused treatment rationale on outcomes individually.
ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT05372744.
多项研究确定了在消极和积极情绪中,欺骗性安慰剂具有情绪调节特性。然而,情绪调节框架的哪些具体特征会影响安慰剂效应,尚未得到实证研究。特别是,尚不清楚安慰剂诱导的对直接情绪抑制或情绪诱导后情绪调节的期望,在情绪调节中是否会产生更强的效果。
本研究旨在确定,通过活性安慰剂鼻喷雾剂诱导的、对情绪发生(以先行因素为重点)与调节能力(反应调节)的特定框架期望,是否会对情绪调节过程产生影响。由于怀疑人格特质会影响安慰剂反应和情绪调节,本研究的另一个目的是检验羞耻易感性、抑郁水平、经验回避和情绪控制的调节作用。
121名健康志愿者被随机分为欺骗性安慰剂组(以先行因素为重点与反应调节指导)或无治疗对照组,然后通过自传回忆实验性地诱导羞耻感。比较各组在状态羞耻、反刍和认知灵活性方面的结果。
在羞耻诱导干预后,以先行因素为重点和反应调节的安慰剂框架均影响了状态羞耻的变化(F = 3.08,95%可信区间 = [0.80 - 5.92],p = 0.044)、反刍(F = 4.80,95%可信区间 = [1.50 - 8.09],p ≤ 0.001)和认知灵活性结果(F = -3.63,95%可信区间 = [-6.75 - -0.51],p = 0.011)。只有以先行因素为重点的安慰剂反应受人格特质调节。经验回避调节了羞耻体验(F(2,115) = 3.470,p = 0.031),而情绪控制影响了状态反刍的报告(F(2,115) = 4.588,p = 0.012)。未观察到抑郁水平和羞耻易感性的调节作用(p > 0.05)。
结果表明,安慰剂治疗可对健康受试者的羞耻感、反刍和认知灵活性产生积极影响。情绪控制和经验回避的人格特质分别影响了以先行因素为重点的治疗原理对结果的安慰剂反应。
ClinicalTrials.gov,标识符NCT05372744。