Cognitive functioning and creativity in the face of personal stress in previously-depressed people

In people with remitted depression, is stress-related humor more effective than stress-unrelated humor in regulating negative emotions? What is the role of selective attention deficits in humor-based emotion regulation?

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

ISRCTN

Registry ID

ISRCTN86314628

Enrollment

120

Registered

2021-09-20

Start date

2015-06-05

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2022-08-05

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

Conditions

Determining effective emotion regulation strategies (stress-related humor, stress-unrelated humor, non-humorous strategy) in patients with remitted depression. Mental and Behavioural Disorders

Interventions

Participants will take part in a double-blind laboratory experiment

it will consist of stress induction (recalling any current personally stressful issue) and emotion regulation manipulation, which will involve the use of one of the three strategies corresponding to t

in the stress-unrelated humor condition, it will be humorous and unrelated to one’s own stressful issue

and in the non-humorous condition, it will be rational and related to one’s own stressful issue. The experimental manipulation is derived from stress management techniques. The participants will be pr

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. Participants from outpatient psychiatric clinics (aged 18-65) with a diagnosis of remission after a depressive episode 1.1. The diagnosis is made by a psychiatrist and confirmed via a Structured Clinical Interview (SCID I) administered by a clinical psychologist blind to the psychiatric diagnosis. 1.2. Depressive symptoms: An additional inclusion criterion is a BDI-II score above a cut-off of 16.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. History of manic or psychotic episodes, head injury, or neurological disorder 2. Current presence of eating disorders, anxiety disorders, intellectual disability, psychoactive substance use, pregnancy, or suicidal ideation

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Positive emotions, negative emotions, and experienced distress are measured using single self-report scales, from 0 (“not at all”) to 6 (“as strong as possible”). Negative emotions and positive emotions are assessed four times: at baseline (T1), after stress induction (T2), after the emotion regulation manipulation (T3), and after 20 minutes (T4). The experienced distress is measured in T2, T3 and T4.	—

Measure

Time frame

Positive emotions, negative emotions, and experienced distress are measured using single self-report scales, from 0 (“not at all”) to 6 (“as strong as possible”). Negative emotions and positive emotions are assessed four times: at baseline (T1), after stress induction (T2), after the emotion regulation manipulation (T3), and after 20 minutes (T4). The experienced distress is measured in T2, T3 and T4.

—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
1. Selective attention measured using the d2 Test of Attention (Brickenkamp & Zillmer, 1998) at the introductory stage (before experiment) 2. Invested effort measured using single self-report scale, which specifies the effort exerted for the task, from 0 (“none”) to 6 (“as much as possible”) immediately after the emotion regulation manipulation (T3) 3. Subsequent performance measured using a multiple-choice knowledge test (with eight questions about the video content) at the end of the neutral nature video the participants watched (T4). 4. Intrusive thoughts measured using self-report - how many times they thought about their stressful situation during the film. 5. manipulation check, the participants answered two questions, one about the subjective funniness of the scenario (“Does this scenario seem funny to you?”) and one about its rationality (“Does this scenario seem rational to you?”), by choosing “yes,” “sort of,” or “no.” They also specified how funny/rational the scenario was, from 0 (“not at all”) to 6 (“as funny/rational as possible”). Then, the participant reported the effort exerted for the task, from 0 (“none”) to 6 (“as much as possible”). A single assessment was conducted to measure invested effort (T3), subsequent performance (T4) and intrusive thoughts (T4).	—

Measure

Time frame

1. Selective attention measured using the d2 Test of Attention (Brickenkamp & Zillmer, 1998) at the introductory stage (before experiment) 2. Invested effort measured using single self-report scale, which specifies the effort exerted for the task, from 0 (“none”) to 6 (“as much as possible”) immediately after the emotion regulation manipulation (T3) 3. Subsequent performance measured using a multiple-choice knowledge test (with eight questions about the video content) at the end of the neutral nature video the participants watched (T4). 4. Intrusive thoughts measured using self-report - how many times they thought about their stressful situation during the film. 5. manipulation check, the participants answered two questions, one about the subjective funniness of the scenario (“Does this scenario seem funny to you?”) and one about its rationality (“Does this scenario seem rational to you?”), by choosing “yes,” “sort of,” or “no.” They also specified how funny/rational the scenario was, from 0 (“not at all”) to 6 (“as funny/rational as possible”). Then, the participant reported the effort exerted for the task, from 0 (“none”) to 6 (“as much as possible”). A single assessment was conducted to measure invested effort (T3), subsequent performance (T4) and intrusive thoughts (T4).

—

Countries

Poland

Contacts

Public ContactAnna Braniecka

abraniecka@swps.edu.pl+48 696232981

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ISRCTN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 18, 2026