Studying the psychological processes of resolving approach-avoidance conflict
| ISRCTN | ISRCTN11198115 |
|---|---|
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN11198115 |
| Secondary identifying numbers | AAAB |
- Submission date
- 29/09/2015
- Registration date
- 13/10/2015
- Last edited
- 15/11/2021
- Recruitment status
- Stopped
- Overall study status
- Stopped
- Condition category
- Mental and Behavioural Disorders
Plain English summary of protocol
Background and study aims
Anxiety is a term which is used to describe feelings of worry, unease or fear. Though it is perfectly normal to feel anxious from time to time, it can become a very serious mental health problem. As well as being a mental health condition in its own right, it is a common symptom of other problems such as depression and schizophrenia. The most common type of behaviour that accompanies anxiety is an inability to make decisions. Our brains are hard-wired to automatically “avoid” situations which we see as being unpleasant and “approach” situations we see as being pleasant. This phenomenon called the approach-avoidance conflict. The approach-avoidance conflict is known to cause stress, particularly in people who are prone to feeling anxious. A common way of testing approach-avoidance in people is by using specially designed videogames, which include incentives such as collecting points (approach motivation) and deterrents such as losing points (avoidance motivation). The aim of this study is to look at approach-avoidance behaviour while playing videogames to identify signs of anxiety.
Who can participate?
600 healthy adults between 18 and 40 years of age, with normal vision.
What does the study involve?
Participants are asked to play a videogame in a number of scenarios. The first video game involves catching diamonds on a grid (approach motivation) and with the possibility of a virtual “robber” stealing these diamonds (avoidance motivation). The participants have the option of starting the game near to the robber (active start) or hidden from the robber (passive start). Video game two involves a much smaller grid of four squares, where the participant has to perform tasks in order to collect the diamonds. Participants play videogame 1 or 2 alone or with the additional components: distractions (e.g. loud noises), being able to “catch the robber” within the game, find out more information about the robber or being offered a financial incentive for winning. Throughout the period of playing the games, performance in the game is judged based on how many diamonds the participants in each group manage to collect. Participant’s physical responses to playing the games, such as heart rate and breathing rate are also monitored.
What are the possible benefits and risks of participating?
Possible benefits of the study may be that those with anxiety problems will be identified and can receive treatment. There are no notable risks of participating in the study.
Where is the study run from?
Psychiatric University Hospital Zürich (Switzerland)
When is the study starting and how long is it expected to run for?
October 2015 to December 2015
Who is funding the study?
University of Zürich (Switzerland)
Who is the main contact?
Professor Dominik Bach
Contact information
Scientific
Psychiatric University Hospital (Psychiatrische Universitätsklinik)
Lenggstrasse 31
Postfach 1931
Zurich
8032
Switzerland
 ORCID ID |
0000-0003-3717-2036 |
|---|
Study information
| Study design | Observational cross sectional study |
|---|---|
| Primary study design | Observational |
| Secondary study design | Cross sectional study |
| Study setting(s) | Hospital |
| Study type | Other |
| Scientific title | Psychological mechanisms of resolving approach-avoidance conflict - a behavioural study |
| Study objectives | The aim of this study is to investigate, on a behavioural level, approach-avoidance conflict resolution in humans using simple computer games. |
| Ethics approval(s) | Kantonale Ethikkommission Zürich, 17/07/2015, ref: KEK-ZH-2015-0169 |
| Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied | Basic psychological mechanisms of resolving goal conflict |
| Intervention | Of the recruited 600 participants, 60 are selected to play the computer game in one of the ten experimental situations. Throughout the duration of the game psychophysiological control variables are monitored, as well as individual performance within the game. Experiment 1: In Computer Game 1, participants have to catch diamonds on a grid (approach motivation). At the same time, there is a possibility that a virtual "robber" might wake up and take away all diamonds that the participant has collected (avoidance motivation). In each game round, one of three robbers representing different probabilities of waking up is present but inactive in a corner of the grid. The behavioural response to different levels of threat is investigated by allowing the probability of an attack to vary across trials. In the beginning of each trial the predator resides inactive in a corner of the grid, while the participant can either start in the same corner (active start) or from a “safe place” – a corner where the participant cannot be caught (passive start). Experiment 2: Computer Game 2 is similar to Computer Game 1, but the grid is reduced to four squares. This forces participants to perform individual actions for collecting diamonds. Individual actions in this game relate to simple "Go" and "No Go" responses. Experiment 3: Computer Game 1 with an additional aversive components (mild electrical stimulation/loud noises). Experiment 4: Computer Game 2 with an additional aversive components (mild electrical stimulation/loud noises). Experiment 5: Computer Game 1 with an additional possibility of "catching the robber", to assess fight/flight tendencies. Experiment 6: Computer Game 2 with an additional possibility of "catching the robber", to assess fight/flight tendencies. Experiment 7: Computer Game 1 with an additional possibility of sampling information about the robber, to assess risk assessment tendencies. Experiment 8: Computer Game 2 with an additional possibility of sampling information about the robber, to assess risk assessment tendencies. Experiment 9: Computer Game 1 with two levels of financial motivation, to disambiguate effects of "threat" from effects of financial gain. Experiment 10: Computer Game 2 with two levels of financial motivation, to disambiguate effects of "threat" from effects of financial gain. |
| Intervention type | Behavioural |
| Primary outcome measure | Game performance is measured by the number of tokens collected during the 1-2 hour computer game. |
| Secondary outcome measures | The following outcomes are measured continuously while the participant is playing the video game: 1. Skin conductance responses is measured via two electrodes that are placed on the hand 2. Heart rate is measured via electrocardiogramm (ECG) 3. Respiration rate is measured via a distension-sensitive belt around the chest 4. Pupil size is measured with an eye-tracking device 5. Facial EMG is measured via two electrodes below the left eye |
| Overall study start date | 01/11/2015 |
| Completion date | 31/12/2019 |
| Reason abandoned (if study stopped) | Lack of funding/sponsorship |
Eligibility
| Participant type(s) | Healthy volunteer |
|---|---|
| Age group | Adult |
| Lower age limit | 18 Years |
| Sex | Both |
| Target number of participants | For each experiment (1-10), 60 persons will be recruited |
| Total final enrolment | 21 |
| Key inclusion criteria | 1. Informed Consent as documented by signature 2. Aged between 18 and 40 years 3. Normal vision |
| Key exclusion criteria | 1. Reported use of any drugs in the 2 weeks prior to the study with the exception of contraceptive drugs and incidental use of NSARs or paracetamol 2. Reported clinically significant concomitant disease states (e.g., renal failure, hepatic dysfunction, cardiovascular disease, etc.) 3. Reported history of psychiatric, neurological, dependence or systemic/rheumatic disease 4. Reported or suspected non-compliance, drug or alcohol abuse 5. Inability to follow the procedures of the study, e.g. due to language problems 6. Participation in a study with investigational drug within the 30 days preceding and during the present study 7. Previous enrolment into the current study 8. Members of the study team and their family members and dependants |
| Date of first enrolment | 01/12/2015 |
| Date of final enrolment | 01/12/2017 |
Locations
Countries of recruitment
- Switzerland
Study participating centre
Postfach 1931
Zurich
8032
Switzerland
Sponsor information
University/education
c/o Prof. Dominik R. Bach
Psychiatric University Hospital (Psychiatrische Universitätsklinik)
Lenggstrasse 31
Postfach 1931
Zurich
8032
Switzerland
| Website | http://www.pukzh.ch/ |
|---|---|
"ROR" |
https://ror.org/01462r250 |
Funders
Funder type
University/education
No information available
Results and Publications
| Intention to publish date | |
|---|---|
| Individual participant data (IPD) Intention to share | Yes |
| IPD sharing plan summary | Available on request |
| Publication and dissemination plan | We intend to publish the results of the study in a peer-reviewed journal within 2 years following data collection. The anonymity of participants shall be guaranteed. Updated 15/11/2021: The study was discarded due to funding discontinuation. No publication is planned. |
| IPD sharing plan | The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are/will be available upon request. |
Editorial Notes
15/11/2021: The study was stopped due to funding discontinuation. No publication is planned.
10/09/2019: The following changes were made to the trial record:
1. The recruitment end date was changed from 01/08/2019 to 01/12/2017.
2. The overall trial end date was changed from 01/11/2019 to 31/12/2019.
