Effectiveness of an Affective Mentalization Intervention on Affective Polarization in an Online General Population Sample

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

DRKS

Registry ID

DRKS00029100

Enrollment

800

Registered

2026-02-17

Start date

2026-08-01

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2026-08-03

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Affective polarization F32.0

Interventions

Group 1: No-treatment condition: No polarization induction, no intervention. This condition serves as a reference for interpreting the effects of the polarization induction and the subsequent interve

2. Mindfulness intervention: participants complete a mindfulness exercise (body scan). Group 4: Affective mentalization (experimental condition): 1. Polarization induction (see Arm 2)

2. Affective mentalization intervention: Participants are asked to imagine a person with mentalizing abilities (i.e., an empathic person who is able to, for instance, acknowledge ambivalence and respo

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Age

18 Years to No maximum

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: U.S. general population sample.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Failure to pass an attention check.

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Degree of affective polarization, measured using an emotion thermometer (Iyengar et al., 2012) as well as emotions associated with affective polarization (see Renström et al., 2023; Webster et al., 2022; Mau et al., 2023).	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
The following constructs, among others, are measured as secondary variables (as state): cognitive polarization and democratic intentions (Reininger et al., 2025); social dominance orientation using the Social Dominance Orientation Scale (SDO; Pratto et al., 1994); authoritarianism using the Short Scale of Authoritarianism (KSA-3; Nießen et al., 2019) and the Modern Comprehensive F Scale (MCF-9; Sorrentino et al., 2025); attitudes toward political out-groups; depressive symptoms using the short version of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CESD-10; Andresen et al., 1994); latent aggression using the short version of the Responsibility and Interpersonal Behaviors and Attitudes Questionnaire (RIBAQ-R; Moritz et al., 2013); Democracy Autocracy Preference (DPA) and Democratic Performance Evaluation (DPE). The primary and secondary outcomes are assessed immediately following the respective intervention.	—

Measure

Time frame

The following constructs, among others, are measured as secondary variables (as state): cognitive polarization and democratic intentions (Reininger et al., 2025); social dominance orientation using the Social Dominance Orientation Scale (SDO; Pratto et al., 1994); authoritarianism using the Short Scale of Authoritarianism (KSA-3; Nießen et al., 2019) and the Modern Comprehensive F Scale (MCF-9; Sorrentino et al., 2025); attitudes toward political out-groups; depressive symptoms using the short version of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CESD-10; Andresen et al., 1994); latent aggression using the short version of the Responsibility and Interpersonal Behaviors and Attitudes Questionnaire (RIBAQ-R; Moritz et al., 2013); Democracy Autocracy Preference (DPA) and Democratic Performance Evaluation (DPE). The primary and secondary outcomes are assessed immediately following the respective intervention.

—

Countries

United States

Contacts

Public ContactKlaus Michael Reininger

UKE, Institut für Psychotherapie

m.reininger@uke.uni-hamburg.de+4940741052975

Outcome results

None listed

Source: DRKS (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Aug 10, 2026