Skip to content

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.

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT07810348
Enrollment
75
Registered
2026-09-09
Start date
2026-03-14
Completion date
2026-08-14
Last updated
2026-09-09

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

Conditions

Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD)

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.

Interventions

OTHERAI-Proactive thought control

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.

OTHERCognitive Behavior Therapy

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)

OTHERActive Control

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.

Sponsors

Farah Shahzadi
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 26 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* 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.

Exclusion criteria

* 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.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale-Self ReportBaseline (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 periodLiebowitz Social Anxiety Scale-Self-Report; range 0-144; higher = worse (greater social anxiety severity)
Core Belief Questionnaire (CBQ)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 periodCore 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)".
Dot Probe taskBaseline (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 periodmilliseconds; more positive = stronger bias toward social threat
word sentence association paradigmBaseline (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 periodhigher = more threat-relevant interpretation bias
Behavioral Avoidance TaskBaseline (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 periodSUDS 0-100; higher = more subjective distress

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
beck depression inventory IIBaseline (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 periodrange 0-63; higher = worse

Countries

Pakistan

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Sep 10, 2026