PerfectionismNCT05385289
A Cognitive-behavioral Intervention of Rumination for Perfectionists
A study testing A cognitive-behavioral approach of rumination as intervention for overgeneral mode of processing in perfectionism in people with Perfectionism and Rumination - Thoughts, run by Université Catholique de Louvain at 1 site in Belgium.
Trial summary
This study aims to investigate the mediating role of rumination in the relationship between perfectionism and psychological distress, by proposing a cognitive-behavioral intervention targeting rumination. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Perfectionism, Rumination - Thoughts, Anxiety
- What is being tested?
- A cognitive-behavioral approach of rumination as intervention for overgeneral mode of processing in perfectionism
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 13 participants
- Where
- 1 siteBelgium
- Study dates
- 14 Mar 2022to 24 Nov 2022
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Being native French speakers
- Reporting significant levels of (1) perfectionism, (2) abstract and evaluative repetitive thinking, and (3) anxio-depressive symptoms.
Who cannot join
- Being involved in a therapeutic treatment.
- Being under 18 years old.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Belgium1 site
Université catholique de Louvain
Louvain-la-Neuve, Brabant Wallon, 1348
About this study
Official title: A Cognitive-behavioral Approach of Rumination as Intervention for Overgeneral Mode of Processing in Perfectionism: a Single-case Experimental Design
This study aims to investigate the mediating role of rumination in the relationship between perfectionism and psychological distress, by proposing a cognitive-behavioral intervention targeting rumination. This intervention aims at decreasing - or even neutralizing - the effect of the mediator and then examining how this decrease impacts the relationship between perfectionism and psychological distress.
A randomized, concurrent, multiple-baseline single-case design will be applied.
Read the detailed description
Perfectionism is defined as "exceedingly high standards of performance accompanied by critical evaluations of oneself and others and a fear of negative social evaluation if not perfect". Factorial analyses of the two main perfectionism scales have identified two overarching dimensions: Perfectionistic Strivings and Perfectionistic Concerns. The perfectionistic concerns dimension is generally associated with negative outcomes and psychopathology, while perfectionistic strivings have been found to yield both positive outcomes and negative outcomes.
Perfectionism is a central transdiagnostic phenomenon involved in the maintenance of multiple psychological disorders (e.g., anorexia nervosa, obsessive compulsive disorder, chronic fatigue, and depression). After decades of research focusing on scales development or relying exclusively on correlational studies, the experimental investigation of the processes underlying perfectionism is just emerging. On a theoretical basis, two processes related to emotional information processing seem particularly relevant: rumination and autobiographical memory. The objective of this study is to investigate with a randomized, concurrent, multiple-baseline single-case design the contribution of these processes to perfectionists' psychological vulnerability.
Rumination is defined as a mental process characterized by repetitive, prolonged, and recurrent thinking about one's concerns and one's experience. The control theory suggests that individuals engage in rumination when perceiving a discrepancy between their goals and their current condition, and stay in this mode of thinking until the goal is either attained or abandoned. Based on this theoretical background, recent research suggests that rumination could be one of the processes explaining the perfectionistic vulnerability to psychological distress, by perseveringly focusing on the discrepancy between high and demanding standards and the actual performance. However, only few study has experimentally manipulated this process, thus precluding from any causal inference.
Autobiographical memories are "memories about personal experiences that go beyond the mere factual description of the event to include personal beliefs, emotions, and thoughts". One feature of those memories is the specificity level defined as "the extent to which retrieved autobiographical memories are specific or not (i.e., memory of a particular event that happened at a particular time and place that lasted no more than one day). Difficulty with retrieving such specific memories is called overgeneral autobiographical memory".
The perfectionism cognition theory aims to clarify how autobiographical memory and working memory might be affected by perfectionist tendencies. It especially postulates retroactive loops between (a) repetitive thinking, (b) an overdeveloped memory for mistakes, failures, and stressful experiences, and (c) a hypervigilance and cognitive bias toward related cues that signal the possibility of failure, mistakes, and negative social evaluation. These authors suggested that perfectionists are characterized by deficits in attentional capacity and working memory during times of stress. This promising cognitive approach has partially been supported. For example, a recent meta-analysis states that perseverative cognitions (i.e., worry and rumination) mediate the relationship between perfectionism and distress in non-clinical samples. However, empirical evidence of an experimental nature is still needed, in particular for the postulated autobiographical memory and working memory biases.
To overcome those limitations, the present study will manipulate rumination with a clinical intervention, to block its mediational role on the relationship between perfectionism and psychological distress (here operationalized by mood state and anxio-depressive symptoms). Moreover, this study aims to go further than identifying a true mediator: its aims to explain the mechanism "through which change come about", namely through a concreteness training to overcome overgeneral mode of processing. Indeed, even if the main focus of the study is to identify mediators that may statistically account for the relationship between perfectionism and psychological distress, a ideal purpose is to propose a therapeutic intervention that may target mechanisms of change underlying hypothesized mediator.
- Conditions
- Perfectionism, Rumination - Thoughts, Anxiety, Depression
- Being tested
- A cognitive-behavioral approach of rumination as intervention for overgeneral mode of processing in perfectionism
- Keywords
- Perfectionism, Rumination, Autobiographical Memory, Overgeneral processing, SCED
- Medical subject headings
- Anxiety Disorders, Depression, Rumination Syndrome
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
A cognitive-behavioral approach of rumination as intervention for overgeneral mode of processing in perfectionismBehavioural
The B-experimental phase consists in a 6-session intervention targeting rumination and lasting for 3 weeks. The intervention was derived from 3 manuals: Rumination-Focused Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Depression (Watkins, 2016), Overcoming Perfectionism (Shafran et al., 2010), and Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment of Perfectionism (Egan et al., 2014). Participants will attend 2 sessions per week at home. Each week will end with an individual 30 minutes-debriefing session with an experimenter, to ascertain understanding of session content and homework.
Intervention sessions will be given in paper format to participant after the A-baseline-phase. A paper diary was also provided for homework, in addition to the session content caneva. Each session contains (a) theoretical content on ruminations linked to perfectionism, (b) exercises to create alternative habits to ruminations, and (c) homework to become aware of ruminations and to experiment with alternatives.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| First wave with 6 participants | Experimental | Once selected, an individual online information session will be scheduled with each selected participant to explain the project and its practical implications. At this time, six of the twelve participants will be provided a link to complete online measures as the A-baseline phase, to constitute their own non-intervention control condition on the target behavior (i.e., rumination) and on positive and negative emotions. The other six participants will be entered into a 3-week waiting list period with a sequential introduction, to provide another non-intervention control condition.
The A-baseline phase length will include at least 5 measures and most 10 measures, resulting in 10 potential starting point for the B-experimental phase. This range will be determined to estimate autocorrelation and its associated bias. Receives: Behavioral: A cognitive-behavioral approach of rumination as intervention for overgeneral mode of processing in perfectionism |
| Second wave with 6 other participants | Experimental | After three weeks, the six participants on the waiting list will also begin the same A-baseline phase as the six participants of the first wave. Receives: Behavioral: A cognitive-behavioral approach of rumination as intervention for overgeneral mode of processing in perfectionism |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Perfectionism - Hewitt and Flett's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (HMPS; Hewitt & Flett,1991)
The HMPS includes 45 items assessing the three following subdimensions: Self-Oriented Perfectionism (SOP, reflecting "setting exacting standards for oneself and stringently evaluating and censuring one's own behavior" in the present study), Socially Prescribed Perfectionism (SPP, reflecting "the perceived need to attain standards and expectations prescribed by significant others"), and Other-Oriented Perfectionism (OOP, reflecting "unrealistic standards for significant others, places importance on other people being perfect, and stringently evaluates others' performance"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("totally disagree") to 7 ("totally agree").
Measured: For the recruitment, i.e. until the number of 6 participants is reached for the second wave of the study (approximately two months after the beginning of the study)
Perfectionism - Hewitt and Flett's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (HMPS; Hewitt & Flett,1991)
The HMPS includes 45 items assessing the three following subdimensions: Self-Oriented Perfectionism (SOP, reflecting "setting exacting standards for oneself and stringently evaluating and censuring one's own behavior" in the present study), Socially Prescribed Perfectionism (SPP, reflecting "the perceived need to attain standards and expectations prescribed by significant others"), and Other-Oriented Perfectionism (OOP, reflecting "unrealistic standards for significant others, places importance on other people being perfect, and stringently evaluates others' performance"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("totally disagree") to 7 ("totally agree").
Measured: The day before the beginning of the intervention
Perfectionism - Hewitt and Flett's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (HMPS; Hewitt & Flett,1991)
The HMPS includes 45 items assessing the three following subdimensions: Self-Oriented Perfectionism (SOP, reflecting "setting exacting standards for oneself and stringently evaluating and censuring one's own behavior" in the present study), Socially Prescribed Perfectionism (SPP, reflecting "the perceived need to attain standards and expectations prescribed by significant others"), and Other-Oriented Perfectionism (OOP, reflecting "unrealistic standards for significant others, places importance on other people being perfect, and stringently evaluates others' performance"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("totally disagree") to 7 ("totally agree").
Measured: Once participants have completed 4 sessions of the intervention, about a week and a half after the beginning of the intervention
Perfectionism - Hewitt and Flett's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (HMPS; Hewitt & Flett,1991)
The HMPS includes 45 items assessing the three following subdimensions: Self-Oriented Perfectionism (SOP, reflecting "setting exacting standards for oneself and stringently evaluating and censuring one's own behavior" in the present study), Socially Prescribed Perfectionism (SPP, reflecting "the perceived need to attain standards and expectations prescribed by significant others"), and Other-Oriented Perfectionism (OOP, reflecting "unrealistic standards for significant others, places importance on other people being perfect, and stringently evaluates others' performance"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("totally disagree") to 7 ("totally agree").
Measured: Two weeks after the end of the intervention
Perfectionism - Hewitt and Flett's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (HMPS; Hewitt & Flett,1991)
The HMPS includes 45 items assessing the three following subdimensions: Self-Oriented Perfectionism (SOP, reflecting "setting exacting standards for oneself and stringently evaluating and censuring one's own behavior" in the present study), Socially Prescribed Perfectionism (SPP, reflecting "the perceived need to attain standards and expectations prescribed by significant others"), and Other-Oriented Perfectionism (OOP, reflecting "unrealistic standards for significant others, places importance on other people being perfect, and stringently evaluates others' performance"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("totally disagree") to 7 ("totally agree").
Measured: Three months after the end of the intervention
Perfectionism - Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS; Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate, 1990)
The FMPS is a 35-item questionnaire assessing six subdimensions: Concern Over Mistakes (CM, reflecting "negative reactions to mistakes, a tendency to interpret mistakes as equivalent to failure, and a tendency to believe that one will lose the respect of others following failure"), Personal Standards (PS, reflecting "the setting of very high standards and the excessive importance placed on these high standards for self-evaluation"), Doubts About Actions (DA, reflecting "the tendency to feel that projects are not completed to satisfaction"), Parental Expectations (PE, reflecting "the tendency to believe that one's parents set very high goals and are overly critical"), Parental Criticism (PC, reflecting "the perception of high parental criticism"), and Organization (O, reflecting "the emphasis on the importance of and preference for order and organization"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 5 ("strongly agree").
Measured: For the recruitment, i.e. until the number of 6 participants is reached for the second wave of the study (approximately two months after the beginning of the study)
Perfectionism - Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS; Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate, 1990)
The FMPS is a 35-item questionnaire assessing six subdimensions: Concern Over Mistakes (CM, reflecting "negative reactions to mistakes, a tendency to interpret mistakes as equivalent to failure, and a tendency to believe that one will lose the respect of others following failure"), Personal Standards (PS, reflecting "the setting of very high standards and the excessive importance placed on these high standards for self-evaluation"), Doubts About Actions (DA, reflecting "the tendency to feel that projects are not completed to satisfaction"), Parental Expectations (PE, reflecting "the tendency to believe that one's parents set very high goals and are overly critical"), Parental Criticism (PC, reflecting "the perception of high parental criticism"), and Organization (O, reflecting "the emphasis on the importance of and preference for order and organization"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 5 ("strongly agree").
Measured: The day before the beginning of the intervention
Perfectionism - Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS; Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate, 1990)
The FMPS is a 35-item questionnaire assessing six subdimensions: Concern Over Mistakes (CM, reflecting "negative reactions to mistakes, a tendency to interpret mistakes as equivalent to failure, and a tendency to believe that one will lose the respect of others following failure"), Personal Standards (PS, reflecting "the setting of very high standards and the excessive importance placed on these high standards for self-evaluation"), Doubts About Actions (DA, reflecting "the tendency to feel that projects are not completed to satisfaction"), Parental Expectations (PE, reflecting "the tendency to believe that one's parents set very high goals and are overly critical"), Parental Criticism (PC, reflecting "the perception of high parental criticism"), and Organization (O, reflecting "the emphasis on the importance of and preference for order and organization"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 5 ("strongly agree").
Measured: Once participants have completed 4 sessions of the intervention, about a week and a half after the beginning of the intervention
Perfectionism - Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS; Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate, 1990)
The FMPS is a 35-item questionnaire assessing six subdimensions: Concern Over Mistakes (CM, reflecting "negative reactions to mistakes, a tendency to interpret mistakes as equivalent to failure, and a tendency to believe that one will lose the respect of others following failure"), Personal Standards (PS, reflecting "the setting of very high standards and the excessive importance placed on these high standards for self-evaluation"), Doubts About Actions (DA, reflecting "the tendency to feel that projects are not completed to satisfaction"), Parental Expectations (PE, reflecting "the tendency to believe that one's parents set very high goals and are overly critical"), Parental Criticism (PC, reflecting "the perception of high parental criticism"), and Organization (O, reflecting "the emphasis on the importance of and preference for order and organization"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 5 ("strongly agree").
Measured: Two weeks after the end of the intervention
Perfectionism - Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS; Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate, 1990)
The FMPS is a 35-item questionnaire assessing six subdimensions: Concern Over Mistakes (CM, reflecting "negative reactions to mistakes, a tendency to interpret mistakes as equivalent to failure, and a tendency to believe that one will lose the respect of others following failure"), Personal Standards (PS, reflecting "the setting of very high standards and the excessive importance placed on these high standards for self-evaluation"), Doubts About Actions (DA, reflecting "the tendency to feel that projects are not completed to satisfaction"), Parental Expectations (PE, reflecting "the tendency to believe that one's parents set very high goals and are overly critical"), Parental Criticism (PC, reflecting "the perception of high parental criticism"), and Organization (O, reflecting "the emphasis on the importance of and preference for order and organization"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 5 ("strongly agree").
Measured: Three months after the end of the intervention
Depression - Center for Epidemiologic Studies - Depression (CES-D; Radloff, 1997)
The CES-D is a 20-item questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging to 0 ["rarely or none of the time (less than 1 day)"] to 3 ["most or all of the time (5-7 days)"]. It assesses the frequency of the main symptoms of depression over the past week. Those symptoms are categorized into four subscales: depressed affect (DA), positive affect (PA), somatic complaints (SC), and disturbed interpersonal relationships (IR).
Measured: For the recruitment, i.e. until the number of 6 participants is reached for the second wave of the study (approximately two months after the beginning of the study)
Depression - Center for Epidemiologic Studies - Depression (CES-D; Radloff, 1997)
The CES-D is a 20-item questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging to 0 ["rarely or none of the time (less than 1 day)"] to 3 ["most or all of the time (5-7 days)"]. It assesses the frequency of the main symptoms of depression over the past week. Those symptoms are categorized into four subscales: depressed affect (DA), positive affect (PA), somatic complaints (SC), and disturbed interpersonal relationships (IR).
Measured: The day before the beginning of the intervention
Depression - Center for Epidemiologic Studies - Depression (CES-D; Radloff, 1997)
The CES-D is a 20-item questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging to 0 ["rarely or none of the time (less than 1 day)"] to 3 ["most or all of the time (5-7 days)"]. It assesses the frequency of the main symptoms of depression over the past week. Those symptoms are categorized into four subscales: depressed affect (DA), positive affect (PA), somatic complaints (SC), and disturbed interpersonal relationships (IR).
Measured: Once participants have completed 4 sessions of the intervention, about a week and a half after the beginning of the intervention
Depression - Center for Epidemiologic Studies - Depression (CES-D; Radloff, 1997)
The CES-D is a 20-item questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging to 0 ["rarely or none of the time (less than 1 day)"] to 3 ["most or all of the time (5-7 days)"]. It assesses the frequency of the main symptoms of depression over the past week. Those symptoms are categorized into four subscales: depressed affect (DA), positive affect (PA), somatic complaints (SC), and disturbed interpersonal relationships (IR).
Measured: Two weeks after the end of the intervention
Depression - Center for Epidemiologic Studies - Depression (CES-D; Radloff, 1997)
The CES-D is a 20-item questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging to 0 ["rarely or none of the time (less than 1 day)"] to 3 ["most or all of the time (5-7 days)"]. It assesses the frequency of the main symptoms of depression over the past week. Those symptoms are categorized into four subscales: depressed affect (DA), positive affect (PA), somatic complaints (SC), and disturbed interpersonal relationships (IR).
Measured: Three months after the end of the intervention
Anxiety - Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7; Spitzer, Kroenke, Williams, Löwe, 2008)
The GAD-7 is a seven-items questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). It assesses the presence and the severity of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition) symptom criteria for Generalized Anxiety Disorder over the past week.
Measured: For the recruitment, i.e. until the number of 6 participants is reached for the second wave of the study (approximately two months after the beginning of the study)
Anxiety - Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7; Spitzer, Kroenke, Williams, Löwe, 2008)
The GAD-7 is a seven-items questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). It assesses the presence and the severity of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition) symptom criteria for Generalized Anxiety Disorder over the past week.
Measured: The day before the beginning of the intervention
Anxiety - Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7; Spitzer, Kroenke, Williams, Löwe, 2008)
The GAD-7 is a seven-items questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). It assesses the presence and the severity of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition) symptom criteria for Generalized Anxiety Disorder over the past week.
Measured: Once participants have completed 4 sessions of the intervention, about a week and a half after the beginning of the intervention
Anxiety - Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7; Spitzer, Kroenke, Williams, Löwe, 2008)
The GAD-7 is a seven-items questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). It assesses the presence and the severity of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition) symptom criteria for Generalized Anxiety Disorder over the past week.
Measured: Two weeks after the end of the intervention
Anxiety - Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7; Spitzer, Kroenke, Williams, Löwe, 2008)
The GAD-7 is a seven-items questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). It assesses the presence and the severity of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition) symptom criteria for Generalized Anxiety Disorder over the past week.
Measured: Three months after the end of the intervention
Rumination trait - Repetitive Thinking Mode Questionnaire (RTMQ; Philippot, Verschuren, & Douilliez, in press).
The RTMQ is a 18-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("almost never") to 4 ("almost always"). It assesses three dimensions of repetitive thinking processes : (a) abstract evaluative mode of repetitive thinking (AERT; " thoughts at an abstract, overgeneral level that address the causes and consequence of one's mood or condition, oriented toward the past and future rather than toward the present moment"), (b) concrete experiential mode of repetitive thinking (CERT; " mode of thinking centered on how one is presently feeling and experiencing the ongoing situation, and how a present experience unfolds"), and (c) creative dendritic mode of repetitive thinking (CDRT; "extremely fluent and flexible thinking, with creative content [new and original ideas], not necessarily centered on here and now experience".
Measured: For the recruitment, i.e. until the number of 6 participants is reached for the second wave of the study (approximately two months after the beginning of the study)
Rumination trait - Repetitive Thinking Mode Questionnaire (RTMQ; Philippot, Verschuren, & Douilliez, in press).
The RTMQ is a 18-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("almost never") to 4 ("almost always"). It assesses three dimensions of repetitive thinking processes : (a) abstract evaluative mode of repetitive thinking (AERT; " thoughts at an abstract, overgeneral level that address the causes and consequence of one's mood or condition, oriented toward the past and future rather than toward the present moment"), (b) concrete experiential mode of repetitive thinking (CERT; " mode of thinking centered on how one is presently feeling and experiencing the ongoing situation, and how a present experience unfolds"), and (c) creative dendritic mode of repetitive thinking (CDRT; "extremely fluent and flexible thinking, with creative content [new and original ideas], not necessarily centered on here and now experience".
Measured: The day before the beginning of the intervention
Rumination trait - Repetitive Thinking Mode Questionnaire (RTMQ; Philippot, Verschuren, & Douilliez, in press).
The RTMQ is a 18-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("almost never") to 4 ("almost always"). It assesses three dimensions of repetitive thinking processes : (a) abstract evaluative mode of repetitive thinking (AERT; " thoughts at an abstract, overgeneral level that address the causes and consequence of one's mood or condition, oriented toward the past and future rather than toward the present moment"), (b) concrete experiential mode of repetitive thinking (CERT; " mode of thinking centered on how one is presently feeling and experiencing the ongoing situation, and how a present experience unfolds"), and (c) creative dendritic mode of repetitive thinking (CDRT; "extremely fluent and flexible thinking, with creative content [new and original ideas], not necessarily centered on here and now experience".
Measured: Once participants have completed 4 sessions of the intervention, about a week and a half after the beginning of the intervention
Rumination trait - Repetitive Thinking Mode Questionnaire (RTMQ; Philippot, Verschuren, & Douilliez, in press).
The RTMQ is a 18-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("almost never") to 4 ("almost always"). It assesses three dimensions of repetitive thinking processes : (a) abstract evaluative mode of repetitive thinking (AERT; " thoughts at an abstract, overgeneral level that address the causes and consequence of one's mood or condition, oriented toward the past and future rather than toward the present moment"), (b) concrete experiential mode of repetitive thinking (CERT; " mode of thinking centered on how one is presently feeling and experiencing the ongoing situation, and how a present experience unfolds"), and (c) creative dendritic mode of repetitive thinking (CDRT; "extremely fluent and flexible thinking, with creative content [new and original ideas], not necessarily centered on here and now experience".
Measured: Two weeks after the end of the intervention
Rumination trait - Repetitive Thinking Mode Questionnaire (RTMQ; Philippot, Verschuren, & Douilliez, in press).
The RTMQ is a 18-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("almost never") to 4 ("almost always"). It assesses three dimensions of repetitive thinking processes : (a) abstract evaluative mode of repetitive thinking (AERT; " thoughts at an abstract, overgeneral level that address the causes and consequence of one's mood or condition, oriented toward the past and future rather than toward the present moment"), (b) concrete experiential mode of repetitive thinking (CERT; " mode of thinking centered on how one is presently feeling and experiencing the ongoing situation, and how a present experience unfolds"), and (c) creative dendritic mode of repetitive thinking (CDRT; "extremely fluent and flexible thinking, with creative content [new and original ideas], not necessarily centered on here and now experience".
Measured: Three months after the end of the intervention
Autobiographical Memory - The computerized version of the Autobiographical Memory Test (AMT; Williams et Broadbent, 1986).
This task focuses on retrieving past memories of personal events. A cue word appear on the computer screen. Participants have to click on a button as soon as they had retrieved a specific and autobiographical memory triggered by the cue word, in the time-limit of 1 minute after the cue onset. A window then appears to write the memory with as much specific and contextual details as possible. Before starting this task, participants are specified that the memory must have happened once and lasted less than 24 hours.After describing the memory, participants also have to judge (on a Likert type scale ranging from 0 to 10) the emotional intensity of the reported event. Moreover, they have to assess whether their memory was (1) pleasant, (2) unpleasant or (3) neutral. Finally, participants estimate the year during which this memory occurred.
This AMT contains 6 French common nouns per time-measurement (3 success-relevant words, and 3 failure-relevant words) presented in a random order.
Measured: The day before the beginning of the intervention
Autobiographical Memory - The computerized version of the Autobiographical Memory Test (AMT; Williams et Broadbent, 1986).
This task focuses on retrieving past memories of personal events. A cue word appear on the computer screen. Participants have to click on a button as soon as they had retrieved a specific and autobiographical memory triggered by the cue word, in the time-limit of 1 minute after the cue onset. A window then appears to write the memory with as much specific and contextual details as possible. Before starting this task, participants are specified that the memory must have happened once and lasted less than 24 hours.After describing the memory, participants also have to judge (on a Likert type scale ranging from 0 to 10) the emotional intensity of the reported event. Moreover, they have to assess whether their memory was (1) pleasant, (2) unpleasant or (3) neutral. Finally, participants estimate the year during which this memory occurred.
This AMT contains 6 French common nouns per time-measurement (3 success-relevant words, and 3 failure-relevant words) presented in a random order.
Measured: Once participants have completed 4 sessions of the intervention, about a week and a half after the beginning of the intervention
Autobiographical Memory - The computerized version of the Autobiographical Memory Test (AMT; Williams et Broadbent, 1986).
This task focuses on retrieving past memories of personal events. A cue word appear on the computer screen. Participants have to click on a button as soon as they had retrieved a specific and autobiographical memory triggered by the cue word, in the time-limit of 1 minute after the cue onset. A window then appears to write the memory with as much specific and contextual details as possible. Before starting this task, participants are specified that the memory must have happened once and lasted less than 24 hours.After describing the memory, participants also have to judge (on a Likert type scale ranging from 0 to 10) the emotional intensity of the reported event. Moreover, they have to assess whether their memory was (1) pleasant, (2) unpleasant or (3) neutral. Finally, participants estimate the year during which this memory occurred.
This AMT contains 6 French common nouns per time-measurement (3 success-relevant words, and 3 failure-relevant words) presented in a random order.
Measured: Two weeks after the end of the intervention
Autobiographical Memory - The computerized version of the Autobiographical Memory Test (AMT; Williams et Broadbent, 1986).
This task focuses on retrieving past memories of personal events. A cue word appear on the computer screen. Participants have to click on a button as soon as they had retrieved a specific and autobiographical memory triggered by the cue word, in the time-limit of 1 minute after the cue onset. A window then appears to write the memory with as much specific and contextual details as possible. Before starting this task, participants are specified that the memory must have happened once and lasted less than 24 hours.After describing the memory, participants also have to judge (on a Likert type scale ranging from 0 to 10) the emotional intensity of the reported event. Moreover, they have to assess whether their memory was (1) pleasant, (2) unpleasant or (3) neutral. Finally, participants estimate the year during which this memory occurred.
This AMT contains 6 French common nouns per time-measurement (3 success-relevant words, and 3 failure-relevant words) presented in a random order.
Measured: Three months after the end of the intervention
Multiple measures of Rumination state - State Repetitive Thoughts Questionnaire (SRTQ; Philippot et al., n.d.).
The SRTQ is a 10-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("totally disagree") to 5 ("totally agree"). It assesses the three modes of repetitive thinking (i.e., AERT, CERT, and CDRT) in their state form (i.e., subject to continuous changes and under many influences), in contrast with the RTMQ that assesses repetitive thinking as a stable individual characteristic.
Measured: before the beginning of the intervention
Measure of change - Multiple measures of Rumination state - State Repetitive Thoughts Questionnaire (SRTQ; Philippot et al., n.d.).
The SRTQ is a 10-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("totally disagree") to 5 ("totally agree"). It assesses the three modes of repetitive thinking (i.e., AERT, CERT, and CDRT) in their state form (i.e., subject to continuous changes and under many influences), in contrast with the RTMQ that assesses repetitive thinking as a stable individual characteristic.
Measured: Each day during the intervention, as well as between each week of the intervention
Measure of change - Multiple measures of Rumination state - State Repetitive Thoughts Questionnaire (SRTQ; Philippot et al., n.d.).
The SRTQ is a 10-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("totally disagree") to 5 ("totally agree"). It assesses the three modes of repetitive thinking (i.e., AERT, CERT, and CDRT) in their state form (i.e., subject to continuous changes and under many influences), in contrast with the RTMQ that assesses repetitive thinking as a stable individual characteristic.
Measured: During two weeks after the end of the intervention, to assess the change from the 3-week intervention
Daily positive and negative emotions - Visual Analog Mood Scale (VAMS; McNally, Litz, Prassas, Shin, & Weathers, 1994).
The VAMS is a seven-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 0 ("not at all") to 100 ("extremely"). It assesses the intensity of emotional states in the last few minutes: happy, sad, anxious, angry, emotionally aroused, in a positive mood, and in a negative mood. This questionnaire is used as a psychological distress measure.
Measured: before the beginning of the intervention.
Measure of change - Daily positive and negative emotions - Visual Analog Mood Scale (VAMS; McNally, Litz, Prassas, Shin, & Weathers, 1994).
The VAMS is a seven-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 0 ("not at all") to 100 ("extremely"). It assesses the intensity of emotional states in the last few minutes: happy, sad, anxious, angry, emotionally aroused, in a positive mood, and in a negative mood. This questionnaire is used as a psychological distress measure.
Measured: Each day of the three-week intervention, to assess changes between the 10-day A-baseline phase and the intervention phase, as well as between each week of the intervention
Measure of change - Daily positive and negative emotions - Visual Analog Mood Scale (VAMS; McNally, Litz, Prassas, Shin, & Weathers, 1994).
The VAMS is a seven-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 0 ("not at all") to 100 ("extremely"). It assesses the intensity of emotional states in the last few minutes: happy, sad, anxious, angry, emotionally aroused, in a positive mood, and in a negative mood. This questionnaire is used as a psychological distress measure.
Measured: During two weeks after the end of the intervention, to assess the change from the 3-week intervention
Secondary outcomes (10)
Experiential avoidance - Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire (MEAQ ; Gamez, Chmielewski, Ruggero, Kotov, & Watson, 2011).
The MEAQ is a 62-items questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("Totally disagree") to 6 ("Totally agree"). It assesses experiential avoidance with six different manifestations: Behavioral Avoidance (i.e., "overt, situational avoidance of physical discomfort and distress"), Distress Aversion (i.e., "negative evaluations or attitudes toward distress, nonacceptance of distress"), Procrastination (i.e., "delaying anticipated distress"), Distration/Supression (attempts to ignore or suppress distress"), Repression/Denial (i.e., "distancing and dissociating from distress, lack of distress awareness"), Distress Endurance (i.e., "willingness to behave effectively in the face of distress").
Measured: For the recruitment, i.e. until the number of 6 participants is reached for the second wave of the study (approximately two months after the beginning of the study)
Experiential avoidance - Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire (MEAQ ; Gamez, Chmielewski, Ruggero, Kotov, & Watson, 2011).
The MEAQ is a 62-items questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("Totally disagree") to 6 ("Totally agree"). It assesses experiential avoidance with six different manifestations: Behavioral Avoidance (i.e., "overt, situational avoidance of physical discomfort and distress"), Distress Aversion (i.e., "negative evaluations or attitudes toward distress, nonacceptance of distress"), Procrastination (i.e., "delaying anticipated distress"), Distration/Supression (attempts to ignore or suppress distress"), Repression/Denial (i.e., "distancing and dissociating from distress, lack of distress awareness"), Distress Endurance (i.e., "willingness to behave effectively in the face of distress").
Measured: The day before the beginning of the intervention
Experiential avoidance - Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire (MEAQ ; Gamez, Chmielewski, Ruggero, Kotov, & Watson, 2011).
The MEAQ is a 62-items questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("Totally disagree") to 6 ("Totally agree"). It assesses experiential avoidance with six different manifestations: Behavioral Avoidance (i.e., "overt, situational avoidance of physical discomfort and distress"), Distress Aversion (i.e., "negative evaluations or attitudes toward distress, nonacceptance of distress"), Procrastination (i.e., "delaying anticipated distress"), Distration/Supression (attempts to ignore or suppress distress"), Repression/Denial (i.e., "distancing and dissociating from distress, lack of distress awareness"), Distress Endurance (i.e., "willingness to behave effectively in the face of distress").
Measured: Once participants have completed 4 sessions of the intervention, about a week and a half after the beginning of the intervention
Experiential avoidance - Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire (MEAQ ; Gamez, Chmielewski, Ruggero, Kotov, & Watson, 2011).
The MEAQ is a 62-items questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("Totally disagree") to 6 ("Totally agree"). It assesses experiential avoidance with six different manifestations: Behavioral Avoidance (i.e., "overt, situational avoidance of physical discomfort and distress"), Distress Aversion (i.e., "negative evaluations or attitudes toward distress, nonacceptance of distress"), Procrastination (i.e., "delaying anticipated distress"), Distration/Supression (attempts to ignore or suppress distress"), Repression/Denial (i.e., "distancing and dissociating from distress, lack of distress awareness"), Distress Endurance (i.e., "willingness to behave effectively in the face of distress").
Measured: Two weeks after the end of the intervention
Experiential avoidance - Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire (MEAQ ; Gamez, Chmielewski, Ruggero, Kotov, & Watson, 2011).
The MEAQ is a 62-items questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("Totally disagree") to 6 ("Totally agree"). It assesses experiential avoidance with six different manifestations: Behavioral Avoidance (i.e., "overt, situational avoidance of physical discomfort and distress"), Distress Aversion (i.e., "negative evaluations or attitudes toward distress, nonacceptance of distress"), Procrastination (i.e., "delaying anticipated distress"), Distration/Supression (attempts to ignore or suppress distress"), Repression/Denial (i.e., "distancing and dissociating from distress, lack of distress awareness"), Distress Endurance (i.e., "willingness to behave effectively in the face of distress").
Measured: Three months after the end of the intervention
Self-Discrepancy - Self-Discrepancies Scale (S-DS; Philippot, Dethier, Baeyens, & Bouvard, 2017).
The S-DS assesses the discrepancy between the perceived actual self (i.e., who people believe they are) and (a) the socially prescribe self (i.e., who people believe others would want them to be) or (b) the ideal self (i.e., who people ideally would want to be) (Philippot et al. 2017, p.3). Participants are first asked to write a maximum of 8 characteristics that they ideally wish to have (i.e., desired traits) and not have (i.e., undesired traits). They are provided a non-exhaustive sample of 105 characteristics, representing competence, likability, and physical appearance. Participants are then asked to estimate how much these characteristics currently define them (%). Finally, they are asked to indicate the extent to which the discrepancy between the perceived actual self and (a) the socially prescribe self or (b) the ideal self-generated distress, with a Likert type scale ranging to 0 ["I do not feel distress"] to 7 ["I feel significant distress"].
Measured: For the recruitment, i.e. until the number of 6 participants is reached for the second wave of the study (approximately two months after the beginning of the study)
Self-Discrepancy - Self-Discrepancies Scale (S-DS; Philippot, Dethier, Baeyens, & Bouvard, 2017).
The S-DS assesses the discrepancy between the perceived actual self (i.e., who people believe they are) and (a) the socially prescribe self (i.e., who people believe others would want them to be) or (b) the ideal self (i.e., who people ideally would want to be) (Philippot et al. 2017, p.3). Participants are first asked to write a maximum of 8 characteristics that they ideally wish to have (i.e., desired traits) and not have (i.e., undesired traits). They are provided a non-exhaustive sample of 105 characteristics, representing competence, likability, and physical appearance. Participants are then asked to estimate how much these characteristics currently define them (%). Finally, they are asked to indicate the extent to which the discrepancy between the perceived actual self and (a) the socially prescribe self or (b) the ideal self-generated distress, with a Likert type scale ranging to 0 ["I do not feel distress"] to 7 ["I feel significant distress"].
Measured: The day before the beginning of the intervention
Self-Discrepancy - Self-Discrepancies Scale (S-DS; Philippot, Dethier, Baeyens, & Bouvard, 2017).
The S-DS assesses the discrepancy between the perceived actual self (i.e., who people believe they are) and (a) the socially prescribe self (i.e., who people believe others would want them to be) or (b) the ideal self (i.e., who people ideally would want to be) (Philippot et al. 2017, p.3). Participants are first asked to write a maximum of 8 characteristics that they ideally wish to have (i.e., desired traits) and not have (i.e., undesired traits). They are provided a non-exhaustive sample of 105 characteristics, representing competence, likability, and physical appearance. Participants are then asked to estimate how much these characteristics currently define them (%). Finally, they are asked to indicate the extent to which the discrepancy between the perceived actual self and (a) the socially prescribe self or (b) the ideal self-generated distress, with a Likert type scale ranging to 0 ["I do not feel distress"] to 7 ["I feel significant distress"].
Measured: Once participants have completed 4 sessions of the intervention, about a week and a half after the beginning of the intervention
Self-Discrepancy - Self-Discrepancies Scale (S-DS; Philippot, Dethier, Baeyens, & Bouvard, 2017).
The S-DS assesses the discrepancy between the perceived actual self (i.e., who people believe they are) and (a) the socially prescribe self (i.e., who people believe others would want them to be) or (b) the ideal self (i.e., who people ideally would want to be) (Philippot et al. 2017, p.3). Participants are first asked to write a maximum of 8 characteristics that they ideally wish to have (i.e., desired traits) and not have (i.e., undesired traits). They are provided a non-exhaustive sample of 105 characteristics, representing competence, likability, and physical appearance. Participants are then asked to estimate how much these characteristics currently define them (%). Finally, they are asked to indicate the extent to which the discrepancy between the perceived actual self and (a) the socially prescribe self or (b) the ideal self-generated distress, with a Likert type scale ranging to 0 ["I do not feel distress"] to 7 ["I feel significant distress"].
Measured: Two weeks after the end of the intervention
Self-Discrepancy - Self-Discrepancies Scale (S-DS; Philippot, Dethier, Baeyens, & Bouvard, 2017).
The S-DS assesses the discrepancy between the perceived actual self (i.e., who people believe they are) and (a) the socially prescribe self (i.e., who people believe others would want them to be) or (b) the ideal self (i.e., who people ideally would want to be) (Philippot et al. 2017, p.3). Participants are first asked to write a maximum of 8 characteristics that they ideally wish to have (i.e., desired traits) and not have (i.e., undesired traits). They are provided a non-exhaustive sample of 105 characteristics, representing competence, likability, and physical appearance. Participants are then asked to estimate how much these characteristics currently define them (%). Finally, they are asked to indicate the extent to which the discrepancy between the perceived actual self and (a) the socially prescribe self or (b) the ideal self-generated distress, with a Likert type scale ranging to 0 ["I do not feel distress"] to 7 ["I feel significant distress"].
Measured: Three months after the end of the intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted23 May 2022
- Study start14 Mar 2022
- Primary completion24 Nov 2022
- Study completion24 Nov 2022
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for PerfectionismStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Université Catholique de LouvainThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- The final sample will comprise 12 participants. The initial sample size was based on Shadish \& Sullivan's (2011) study reporting that the median and modal number of participants in single-case designs is three. Therefore, recruiting 6 participants allowed for a direct intrasubject replication (i.e., a "replication of the experimental effect within the design") while ensuring that three participants were retained despite possible dropout. Moreover, using two waves of six participants (resulting in a total sample of 12 participants) allowed for a direct inter-subject replication (i.e., "repeating the same study but with additional individuals"). Those two replications were used to demonstrate that changes on target behaviors systematically arrives after the intervention introduction, hence controlling for external variables.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 13 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Université Catholique de Louvain
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Pierre Philippot, Principal investigator, pierre.philippot@uclouvain.be
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05385289
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2022/17JAN/016
- Status last verified
- Feb 2023
- First submitted
- 24 Mar 2022
- Last updated
- 8 Feb 2023
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Data and analyses will be available from the investigators
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 8 Feb 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Cognitive-behavioral Approach of Rumination as Intervention for Overgeneral Mode of Processing in Perfectionism: a Single-case Experimental Design
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05385289
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2022/17JAN/016
- Conditions
- Perfectionism, Rumination - Thoughts, Anxiety, Depression
- Keywords
- Perfectionism, Rumination, Autobiographical Memory, Overgeneral processing, SCED
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 13 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Université Catholique de LouvainUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 14 Mar 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 24 Nov 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 24 Nov 2022 (actual)
- First posted
- 23 May 2022 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study aims to investigate the mediating role of rumination in the relationship between perfectionism and psychological distress, by proposing a cognitive-behavioral intervention targeting rumination. This intervention aims at decreasing - or even neutralizing - the effect of the mediator and then examining how this decrease impacts the relationship between perfectionism and psychological distress.
A randomized, concurrent, multiple-baseline single-case design will be applied.
Detailed description
Perfectionism is defined as "exceedingly high standards of performance accompanied by critical evaluations of oneself and others and a fear of negative social evaluation if not perfect". Factorial analyses of the two main perfectionism scales have identified two overarching dimensions: Perfectionistic Strivings and Perfectionistic Concerns. The perfectionistic concerns dimension is generally associated with negative outcomes and psychopathology, while perfectionistic strivings have been found to yield both positive outcomes and negative outcomes.
Perfectionism is a central transdiagnostic phenomenon involved in the maintenance of multiple psychological disorders (e.g., anorexia nervosa, obsessive compulsive disorder, chronic fatigue, and depression). After decades of research focusing on scales development or relying exclusively on correlational studies, the experimental investigation of the processes underlying perfectionism is just emerging. On a theoretical basis, two processes related to emotional information processing seem particularly relevant: rumination and autobiographical memory. The objective of this study is to investigate with a randomized, concurrent, multiple-baseline single-case design the contribution of these processes to perfectionists' psychological vulnerability.
Rumination is defined as a mental process characterized by repetitive, prolonged, and recurrent thinking about one's concerns and one's experience. The control theory suggests that individuals engage in rumination when perceiving a discrepancy between their goals and their current condition, and stay in this mode of thinking until the goal is either attained or abandoned. Based on this theoretical background, recent research suggests that rumination could be one of the processes explaining the perfectionistic vulnerability to psychological distress, by perseveringly focusing on the discrepancy between high and demanding standards and the actual performance. However, only few study has experimentally manipulated this process, thus precluding from any causal inference.
Autobiographical memories are "memories about personal experiences that go beyond the mere factual description of the event to include personal beliefs, emotions, and thoughts". One feature of those memories is the specificity level defined as "the extent to which retrieved autobiographical memories are specific or not (i.e., memory of a particular event that happened at a particular time and place that lasted no more than one day). Difficulty with retrieving such specific memories is called overgeneral autobiographical memory".
The perfectionism cognition theory aims to clarify how autobiographical memory and working memory might be affected by perfectionist tendencies. It especially postulates retroactive loops between (a) repetitive thinking, (b) an overdeveloped memory for mistakes, failures, and stressful experiences, and (c) a hypervigilance and cognitive bias toward related cues that signal the possibility of failure, mistakes, and negative social evaluation. These authors suggested that perfectionists are characterized by deficits in attentional capacity and working memory during times of stress. This promising cognitive approach has partially been supported. For example, a recent meta-analysis states that perseverative cognitions (i.e., worry and rumination) mediate the relationship between perfectionism and distress in non-clinical samples. However, empirical evidence of an experimental nature is still needed, in particular for the postulated autobiographical memory and working memory biases.
To overcome those limitations, the present study will manipulate rumination with a clinical intervention, to block its mediational role on the relationship between perfectionism and psychological distress (here operationalized by mood state and anxio-depressive symptoms). Moreover, this study aims to go further than identifying a true mediator: its aims to explain the mechanism "through which change come about", namely through a concreteness training to overcome overgeneral mode of processing. Indeed, even if the main focus of the study is to identify mediators that may statistically account for the relationship between perfectionism and psychological distress, a ideal purpose is to propose a therapeutic intervention that may target mechanisms of change underlying hypothesized mediator.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- The final sample will comprise 12 participants. The initial sample size was based on Shadish \& Sullivan's (2011) study reporting that the median and modal number of participants in single-case designs is three. Therefore, recruiting 6 participants allowed for a direct intrasubject replication (i.e., a "replication of the experimental effect within the design") while ensuring that three participants were retained despite possible dropout. Moreover, using two waves of six participants (resulting in a total sample of 12 participants) allowed for a direct inter-subject replication (i.e., "repeating the same study but with additional individuals"). Those two replications were used to demonstrate that changes on target behaviors systematically arrives after the intervention introduction, hence controlling for external variables.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| First wave with 6 participants | Experimental | Behavioral: A cognitive-behavioral approach of rumination as intervention for overgeneral mode of processing in perfectionismOnce selected, an individual online information session will be scheduled with each selected participant to explain the project and its practical implications. At this time, six of the twelve participants will be provided a link to complete online measures as the A-baseline phase, to constitute their own non-intervention control condition on the target behavior (i.e., rumination) and on positive and negative emotions. The other six participants will be entered into a 3-week waiting list period with a sequential introduction, to provide another non-intervention control condition. The A-baseline phase length will include at least 5 measures and most 10 measures, resulting in 10 potential starting point for the B-experimental phase. This range will be determined to estimate autocorrelation and its associated bias. |
| Second wave with 6 other participants | Experimental | Behavioral: A cognitive-behavioral approach of rumination as intervention for overgeneral mode of processing in perfectionismAfter three weeks, the six participants on the waiting list will also begin the same A-baseline phase as the six participants of the first wave. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Being native French speakers
- Reporting significant levels of (1) perfectionism, (2) abstract and evaluative repetitive thinking, and (3) anxio-depressive symptoms.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Being involved in a therapeutic treatment.
- Being under 18 years old.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| A cognitive-behavioral approach of rumination as intervention for overgeneral mode of processing in perfectionismThe B-experimental phase consists in a 6-session intervention targeting rumination and lasting for 3 weeks. The intervention was derived from 3 manuals: Rumination-Focused Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Depression (Watkins, 2016), Overcoming Perfectionism (Shafran et al., 2010), and Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment of Perfectionism (Egan et al., 2014). Participants will attend 2 sessions per week at home. Each week will end with an individual 30 minutes-debriefing session with an experimenter, to ascertain understanding of session content and homework. Intervention sessions will be given in paper format to participant after the A-baseline-phase. A paper diary was also provided for homework, in addition to the session content caneva. Each session contains (a) theoretical content on ruminations linked to perfectionism, (b) exercises to create alternative habits to ruminations, and (c) homework to become aware of ruminations and to experiment with alternatives. | Behavioural | First wave with 6 participants, Second wave with 6 other participants |
Primary outcome
Perfectionism - Hewitt and Flett's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (HMPS; Hewitt & Flett,1991)
Time frame: For the recruitment, i.e. until the number of 6 participants is reached for the second wave of the study (approximately two months after the beginning of the study)
The HMPS includes 45 items assessing the three following subdimensions: Self-Oriented Perfectionism (SOP, reflecting "setting exacting standards for oneself and stringently evaluating and censuring one's own behavior" in the present study), Socially Prescribed Perfectionism (SPP, reflecting "the perceived need to attain standards and expectations prescribed by significant others"), and Other-Oriented Perfectionism (OOP, reflecting "unrealistic standards for significant others, places importance on other people being perfect, and stringently evaluates others' performance"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("totally disagree") to 7 ("totally agree").
Perfectionism - Hewitt and Flett's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (HMPS; Hewitt & Flett,1991)
Time frame: The day before the beginning of the intervention
The HMPS includes 45 items assessing the three following subdimensions: Self-Oriented Perfectionism (SOP, reflecting "setting exacting standards for oneself and stringently evaluating and censuring one's own behavior" in the present study), Socially Prescribed Perfectionism (SPP, reflecting "the perceived need to attain standards and expectations prescribed by significant others"), and Other-Oriented Perfectionism (OOP, reflecting "unrealistic standards for significant others, places importance on other people being perfect, and stringently evaluates others' performance"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("totally disagree") to 7 ("totally agree").
Perfectionism - Hewitt and Flett's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (HMPS; Hewitt & Flett,1991)
Time frame: Once participants have completed 4 sessions of the intervention, about a week and a half after the beginning of the intervention
The HMPS includes 45 items assessing the three following subdimensions: Self-Oriented Perfectionism (SOP, reflecting "setting exacting standards for oneself and stringently evaluating and censuring one's own behavior" in the present study), Socially Prescribed Perfectionism (SPP, reflecting "the perceived need to attain standards and expectations prescribed by significant others"), and Other-Oriented Perfectionism (OOP, reflecting "unrealistic standards for significant others, places importance on other people being perfect, and stringently evaluates others' performance"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("totally disagree") to 7 ("totally agree").
Perfectionism - Hewitt and Flett's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (HMPS; Hewitt & Flett,1991)
Time frame: Two weeks after the end of the intervention
The HMPS includes 45 items assessing the three following subdimensions: Self-Oriented Perfectionism (SOP, reflecting "setting exacting standards for oneself and stringently evaluating and censuring one's own behavior" in the present study), Socially Prescribed Perfectionism (SPP, reflecting "the perceived need to attain standards and expectations prescribed by significant others"), and Other-Oriented Perfectionism (OOP, reflecting "unrealistic standards for significant others, places importance on other people being perfect, and stringently evaluates others' performance"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("totally disagree") to 7 ("totally agree").
Perfectionism - Hewitt and Flett's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (HMPS; Hewitt & Flett,1991)
Time frame: Three months after the end of the intervention
The HMPS includes 45 items assessing the three following subdimensions: Self-Oriented Perfectionism (SOP, reflecting "setting exacting standards for oneself and stringently evaluating and censuring one's own behavior" in the present study), Socially Prescribed Perfectionism (SPP, reflecting "the perceived need to attain standards and expectations prescribed by significant others"), and Other-Oriented Perfectionism (OOP, reflecting "unrealistic standards for significant others, places importance on other people being perfect, and stringently evaluates others' performance"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("totally disagree") to 7 ("totally agree").
Perfectionism - Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS; Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate, 1990)
Time frame: For the recruitment, i.e. until the number of 6 participants is reached for the second wave of the study (approximately two months after the beginning of the study)
The FMPS is a 35-item questionnaire assessing six subdimensions: Concern Over Mistakes (CM, reflecting "negative reactions to mistakes, a tendency to interpret mistakes as equivalent to failure, and a tendency to believe that one will lose the respect of others following failure"), Personal Standards (PS, reflecting "the setting of very high standards and the excessive importance placed on these high standards for self-evaluation"), Doubts About Actions (DA, reflecting "the tendency to feel that projects are not completed to satisfaction"), Parental Expectations (PE, reflecting "the tendency to believe that one's parents set very high goals and are overly critical"), Parental Criticism (PC, reflecting "the perception of high parental criticism"), and Organization (O, reflecting "the emphasis on the importance of and preference for order and organization"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 5 ("strongly agree").
Perfectionism - Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS; Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate, 1990)
Time frame: The day before the beginning of the intervention
The FMPS is a 35-item questionnaire assessing six subdimensions: Concern Over Mistakes (CM, reflecting "negative reactions to mistakes, a tendency to interpret mistakes as equivalent to failure, and a tendency to believe that one will lose the respect of others following failure"), Personal Standards (PS, reflecting "the setting of very high standards and the excessive importance placed on these high standards for self-evaluation"), Doubts About Actions (DA, reflecting "the tendency to feel that projects are not completed to satisfaction"), Parental Expectations (PE, reflecting "the tendency to believe that one's parents set very high goals and are overly critical"), Parental Criticism (PC, reflecting "the perception of high parental criticism"), and Organization (O, reflecting "the emphasis on the importance of and preference for order and organization"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 5 ("strongly agree").
Perfectionism - Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS; Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate, 1990)
Time frame: Once participants have completed 4 sessions of the intervention, about a week and a half after the beginning of the intervention
The FMPS is a 35-item questionnaire assessing six subdimensions: Concern Over Mistakes (CM, reflecting "negative reactions to mistakes, a tendency to interpret mistakes as equivalent to failure, and a tendency to believe that one will lose the respect of others following failure"), Personal Standards (PS, reflecting "the setting of very high standards and the excessive importance placed on these high standards for self-evaluation"), Doubts About Actions (DA, reflecting "the tendency to feel that projects are not completed to satisfaction"), Parental Expectations (PE, reflecting "the tendency to believe that one's parents set very high goals and are overly critical"), Parental Criticism (PC, reflecting "the perception of high parental criticism"), and Organization (O, reflecting "the emphasis on the importance of and preference for order and organization"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 5 ("strongly agree").
Perfectionism - Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS; Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate, 1990)
Time frame: Two weeks after the end of the intervention
The FMPS is a 35-item questionnaire assessing six subdimensions: Concern Over Mistakes (CM, reflecting "negative reactions to mistakes, a tendency to interpret mistakes as equivalent to failure, and a tendency to believe that one will lose the respect of others following failure"), Personal Standards (PS, reflecting "the setting of very high standards and the excessive importance placed on these high standards for self-evaluation"), Doubts About Actions (DA, reflecting "the tendency to feel that projects are not completed to satisfaction"), Parental Expectations (PE, reflecting "the tendency to believe that one's parents set very high goals and are overly critical"), Parental Criticism (PC, reflecting "the perception of high parental criticism"), and Organization (O, reflecting "the emphasis on the importance of and preference for order and organization"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 5 ("strongly agree").
Perfectionism - Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS; Frost, Marten, Lahart, and Rosenblate, 1990)
Time frame: Three months after the end of the intervention
The FMPS is a 35-item questionnaire assessing six subdimensions: Concern Over Mistakes (CM, reflecting "negative reactions to mistakes, a tendency to interpret mistakes as equivalent to failure, and a tendency to believe that one will lose the respect of others following failure"), Personal Standards (PS, reflecting "the setting of very high standards and the excessive importance placed on these high standards for self-evaluation"), Doubts About Actions (DA, reflecting "the tendency to feel that projects are not completed to satisfaction"), Parental Expectations (PE, reflecting "the tendency to believe that one's parents set very high goals and are overly critical"), Parental Criticism (PC, reflecting "the perception of high parental criticism"), and Organization (O, reflecting "the emphasis on the importance of and preference for order and organization"). Participants completed the questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 5 ("strongly agree").
Depression - Center for Epidemiologic Studies - Depression (CES-D; Radloff, 1997)
Time frame: For the recruitment, i.e. until the number of 6 participants is reached for the second wave of the study (approximately two months after the beginning of the study)
The CES-D is a 20-item questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging to 0 ["rarely or none of the time (less than 1 day)"] to 3 ["most or all of the time (5-7 days)"]. It assesses the frequency of the main symptoms of depression over the past week. Those symptoms are categorized into four subscales: depressed affect (DA), positive affect (PA), somatic complaints (SC), and disturbed interpersonal relationships (IR).
Depression - Center for Epidemiologic Studies - Depression (CES-D; Radloff, 1997)
Time frame: The day before the beginning of the intervention
The CES-D is a 20-item questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging to 0 ["rarely or none of the time (less than 1 day)"] to 3 ["most or all of the time (5-7 days)"]. It assesses the frequency of the main symptoms of depression over the past week. Those symptoms are categorized into four subscales: depressed affect (DA), positive affect (PA), somatic complaints (SC), and disturbed interpersonal relationships (IR).
Depression - Center for Epidemiologic Studies - Depression (CES-D; Radloff, 1997)
Time frame: Once participants have completed 4 sessions of the intervention, about a week and a half after the beginning of the intervention
The CES-D is a 20-item questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging to 0 ["rarely or none of the time (less than 1 day)"] to 3 ["most or all of the time (5-7 days)"]. It assesses the frequency of the main symptoms of depression over the past week. Those symptoms are categorized into four subscales: depressed affect (DA), positive affect (PA), somatic complaints (SC), and disturbed interpersonal relationships (IR).
Depression - Center for Epidemiologic Studies - Depression (CES-D; Radloff, 1997)
Time frame: Two weeks after the end of the intervention
The CES-D is a 20-item questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging to 0 ["rarely or none of the time (less than 1 day)"] to 3 ["most or all of the time (5-7 days)"]. It assesses the frequency of the main symptoms of depression over the past week. Those symptoms are categorized into four subscales: depressed affect (DA), positive affect (PA), somatic complaints (SC), and disturbed interpersonal relationships (IR).
Depression - Center for Epidemiologic Studies - Depression (CES-D; Radloff, 1997)
Time frame: Three months after the end of the intervention
The CES-D is a 20-item questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging to 0 ["rarely or none of the time (less than 1 day)"] to 3 ["most or all of the time (5-7 days)"]. It assesses the frequency of the main symptoms of depression over the past week. Those symptoms are categorized into four subscales: depressed affect (DA), positive affect (PA), somatic complaints (SC), and disturbed interpersonal relationships (IR).
Anxiety - Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7; Spitzer, Kroenke, Williams, Löwe, 2008)
Time frame: For the recruitment, i.e. until the number of 6 participants is reached for the second wave of the study (approximately two months after the beginning of the study)
The GAD-7 is a seven-items questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). It assesses the presence and the severity of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition) symptom criteria for Generalized Anxiety Disorder over the past week.
Anxiety - Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7; Spitzer, Kroenke, Williams, Löwe, 2008)
Time frame: The day before the beginning of the intervention
The GAD-7 is a seven-items questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). It assesses the presence and the severity of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition) symptom criteria for Generalized Anxiety Disorder over the past week.
Anxiety - Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7; Spitzer, Kroenke, Williams, Löwe, 2008)
Time frame: Once participants have completed 4 sessions of the intervention, about a week and a half after the beginning of the intervention
The GAD-7 is a seven-items questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). It assesses the presence and the severity of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition) symptom criteria for Generalized Anxiety Disorder over the past week.
Anxiety - Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7; Spitzer, Kroenke, Williams, Löwe, 2008)
Time frame: Two weeks after the end of the intervention
The GAD-7 is a seven-items questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). It assesses the presence and the severity of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition) symptom criteria for Generalized Anxiety Disorder over the past week.
Anxiety - Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7; Spitzer, Kroenke, Williams, Löwe, 2008)
Time frame: Three months after the end of the intervention
The GAD-7 is a seven-items questionnaire with a Likert type scale ranging from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). It assesses the presence and the severity of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition) symptom criteria for Generalized Anxiety Disorder over the past week.
Rumination trait - Repetitive Thinking Mode Questionnaire (RTMQ; Philippot, Verschuren, & Douilliez, in press).
Time frame: For the recruitment, i.e. until the number of 6 participants is reached for the second wave of the study (approximately two months after the beginning of the study)
The RTMQ is a 18-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("almost never") to 4 ("almost always"). It assesses three dimensions of repetitive thinking processes : (a) abstract evaluative mode of repetitive thinking (AERT; " thoughts at an abstract, overgeneral level that address the causes and consequence of one's mood or condition, oriented toward the past and future rather than toward the present moment"), (b) concrete experiential mode of repetitive thinking (CERT; " mode of thinking centered on how one is presently feeling and experiencing the ongoing situation, and how a present experience unfolds"), and (c) creative dendritic mode of repetitive thinking (CDRT; "extremely fluent and flexible thinking, with creative content [new and original ideas], not necessarily centered on here and now experience".
Rumination trait - Repetitive Thinking Mode Questionnaire (RTMQ; Philippot, Verschuren, & Douilliez, in press).
Time frame: The day before the beginning of the intervention
The RTMQ is a 18-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("almost never") to 4 ("almost always"). It assesses three dimensions of repetitive thinking processes : (a) abstract evaluative mode of repetitive thinking (AERT; " thoughts at an abstract, overgeneral level that address the causes and consequence of one's mood or condition, oriented toward the past and future rather than toward the present moment"), (b) concrete experiential mode of repetitive thinking (CERT; " mode of thinking centered on how one is presently feeling and experiencing the ongoing situation, and how a present experience unfolds"), and (c) creative dendritic mode of repetitive thinking (CDRT; "extremely fluent and flexible thinking, with creative content [new and original ideas], not necessarily centered on here and now experience".
Rumination trait - Repetitive Thinking Mode Questionnaire (RTMQ; Philippot, Verschuren, & Douilliez, in press).
Time frame: Once participants have completed 4 sessions of the intervention, about a week and a half after the beginning of the intervention
The RTMQ is a 18-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("almost never") to 4 ("almost always"). It assesses three dimensions of repetitive thinking processes : (a) abstract evaluative mode of repetitive thinking (AERT; " thoughts at an abstract, overgeneral level that address the causes and consequence of one's mood or condition, oriented toward the past and future rather than toward the present moment"), (b) concrete experiential mode of repetitive thinking (CERT; " mode of thinking centered on how one is presently feeling and experiencing the ongoing situation, and how a present experience unfolds"), and (c) creative dendritic mode of repetitive thinking (CDRT; "extremely fluent and flexible thinking, with creative content [new and original ideas], not necessarily centered on here and now experience".
Rumination trait - Repetitive Thinking Mode Questionnaire (RTMQ; Philippot, Verschuren, & Douilliez, in press).
Time frame: Two weeks after the end of the intervention
The RTMQ is a 18-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("almost never") to 4 ("almost always"). It assesses three dimensions of repetitive thinking processes : (a) abstract evaluative mode of repetitive thinking (AERT; " thoughts at an abstract, overgeneral level that address the causes and consequence of one's mood or condition, oriented toward the past and future rather than toward the present moment"), (b) concrete experiential mode of repetitive thinking (CERT; " mode of thinking centered on how one is presently feeling and experiencing the ongoing situation, and how a present experience unfolds"), and (c) creative dendritic mode of repetitive thinking (CDRT; "extremely fluent and flexible thinking, with creative content [new and original ideas], not necessarily centered on here and now experience".
Rumination trait - Repetitive Thinking Mode Questionnaire (RTMQ; Philippot, Verschuren, & Douilliez, in press).
Time frame: Three months after the end of the intervention
The RTMQ is a 18-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("almost never") to 4 ("almost always"). It assesses three dimensions of repetitive thinking processes : (a) abstract evaluative mode of repetitive thinking (AERT; " thoughts at an abstract, overgeneral level that address the causes and consequence of one's mood or condition, oriented toward the past and future rather than toward the present moment"), (b) concrete experiential mode of repetitive thinking (CERT; " mode of thinking centered on how one is presently feeling and experiencing the ongoing situation, and how a present experience unfolds"), and (c) creative dendritic mode of repetitive thinking (CDRT; "extremely fluent and flexible thinking, with creative content [new and original ideas], not necessarily centered on here and now experience".
Autobiographical Memory - The computerized version of the Autobiographical Memory Test (AMT; Williams et Broadbent, 1986).
Time frame: The day before the beginning of the intervention
This task focuses on retrieving past memories of personal events. A cue word appear on the computer screen. Participants have to click on a button as soon as they had retrieved a specific and autobiographical memory triggered by the cue word, in the time-limit of 1 minute after the cue onset. A window then appears to write the memory with as much specific and contextual details as possible. Before starting this task, participants are specified that the memory must have happened once and lasted less than 24 hours.After describing the memory, participants also have to judge (on a Likert type scale ranging from 0 to 10) the emotional intensity of the reported event. Moreover, they have to assess whether their memory was (1) pleasant, (2) unpleasant or (3) neutral. Finally, participants estimate the year during which this memory occurred. This AMT contains 6 French common nouns per time-measurement (3 success-relevant words, and 3 failure-relevant words) presented in a random order.
Autobiographical Memory - The computerized version of the Autobiographical Memory Test (AMT; Williams et Broadbent, 1986).
Time frame: Once participants have completed 4 sessions of the intervention, about a week and a half after the beginning of the intervention
This task focuses on retrieving past memories of personal events. A cue word appear on the computer screen. Participants have to click on a button as soon as they had retrieved a specific and autobiographical memory triggered by the cue word, in the time-limit of 1 minute after the cue onset. A window then appears to write the memory with as much specific and contextual details as possible. Before starting this task, participants are specified that the memory must have happened once and lasted less than 24 hours.After describing the memory, participants also have to judge (on a Likert type scale ranging from 0 to 10) the emotional intensity of the reported event. Moreover, they have to assess whether their memory was (1) pleasant, (2) unpleasant or (3) neutral. Finally, participants estimate the year during which this memory occurred. This AMT contains 6 French common nouns per time-measurement (3 success-relevant words, and 3 failure-relevant words) presented in a random order.
Autobiographical Memory - The computerized version of the Autobiographical Memory Test (AMT; Williams et Broadbent, 1986).
Time frame: Two weeks after the end of the intervention
This task focuses on retrieving past memories of personal events. A cue word appear on the computer screen. Participants have to click on a button as soon as they had retrieved a specific and autobiographical memory triggered by the cue word, in the time-limit of 1 minute after the cue onset. A window then appears to write the memory with as much specific and contextual details as possible. Before starting this task, participants are specified that the memory must have happened once and lasted less than 24 hours.After describing the memory, participants also have to judge (on a Likert type scale ranging from 0 to 10) the emotional intensity of the reported event. Moreover, they have to assess whether their memory was (1) pleasant, (2) unpleasant or (3) neutral. Finally, participants estimate the year during which this memory occurred. This AMT contains 6 French common nouns per time-measurement (3 success-relevant words, and 3 failure-relevant words) presented in a random order.
Autobiographical Memory - The computerized version of the Autobiographical Memory Test (AMT; Williams et Broadbent, 1986).
Time frame: Three months after the end of the intervention
This task focuses on retrieving past memories of personal events. A cue word appear on the computer screen. Participants have to click on a button as soon as they had retrieved a specific and autobiographical memory triggered by the cue word, in the time-limit of 1 minute after the cue onset. A window then appears to write the memory with as much specific and contextual details as possible. Before starting this task, participants are specified that the memory must have happened once and lasted less than 24 hours.After describing the memory, participants also have to judge (on a Likert type scale ranging from 0 to 10) the emotional intensity of the reported event. Moreover, they have to assess whether their memory was (1) pleasant, (2) unpleasant or (3) neutral. Finally, participants estimate the year during which this memory occurred. This AMT contains 6 French common nouns per time-measurement (3 success-relevant words, and 3 failure-relevant words) presented in a random order.
Multiple measures of Rumination state - State Repetitive Thoughts Questionnaire (SRTQ; Philippot et al., n.d.).
Time frame: before the beginning of the intervention
The SRTQ is a 10-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("totally disagree") to 5 ("totally agree"). It assesses the three modes of repetitive thinking (i.e., AERT, CERT, and CDRT) in their state form (i.e., subject to continuous changes and under many influences), in contrast with the RTMQ that assesses repetitive thinking as a stable individual characteristic.
Measure of change - Multiple measures of Rumination state - State Repetitive Thoughts Questionnaire (SRTQ; Philippot et al., n.d.).
Time frame: Each day during the intervention, as well as between each week of the intervention
The SRTQ is a 10-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("totally disagree") to 5 ("totally agree"). It assesses the three modes of repetitive thinking (i.e., AERT, CERT, and CDRT) in their state form (i.e., subject to continuous changes and under many influences), in contrast with the RTMQ that assesses repetitive thinking as a stable individual characteristic.
Measure of change - Multiple measures of Rumination state - State Repetitive Thoughts Questionnaire (SRTQ; Philippot et al., n.d.).
Time frame: During two weeks after the end of the intervention, to assess the change from the 3-week intervention
The SRTQ is a 10-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 1 ("totally disagree") to 5 ("totally agree"). It assesses the three modes of repetitive thinking (i.e., AERT, CERT, and CDRT) in their state form (i.e., subject to continuous changes and under many influences), in contrast with the RTMQ that assesses repetitive thinking as a stable individual characteristic.
Daily positive and negative emotions - Visual Analog Mood Scale (VAMS; McNally, Litz, Prassas, Shin, & Weathers, 1994).
Time frame: before the beginning of the intervention.
The VAMS is a seven-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 0 ("not at all") to 100 ("extremely"). It assesses the intensity of emotional states in the last few minutes: happy, sad, anxious, angry, emotionally aroused, in a positive mood, and in a negative mood. This questionnaire is used as a psychological distress measure.
Measure of change - Daily positive and negative emotions - Visual Analog Mood Scale (VAMS; McNally, Litz, Prassas, Shin, & Weathers, 1994).
Time frame: Each day of the three-week intervention, to assess changes between the 10-day A-baseline phase and the intervention phase, as well as between each week of the intervention
The VAMS is a seven-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 0 ("not at all") to 100 ("extremely"). It assesses the intensity of emotional states in the last few minutes: happy, sad, anxious, angry, emotionally aroused, in a positive mood, and in a negative mood. This questionnaire is used as a psychological distress measure.
Measure of change - Daily positive and negative emotions - Visual Analog Mood Scale (VAMS; McNally, Litz, Prassas, Shin, & Weathers, 1994).
Time frame: During two weeks after the end of the intervention, to assess the change from the 3-week intervention
The VAMS is a seven-item questionnaire, with a Likert type scale ranging from 0 ("not at all") to 100 ("extremely"). It assesses the intensity of emotional states in the last few minutes: happy, sad, anxious, angry, emotionally aroused, in a positive mood, and in a negative mood. This questionnaire is used as a psychological distress measure.
10 secondary outcomes
Experiential avoidance - Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire (MEAQ ; Gamez, Chmielewski, Ruggero, Kotov, & Watson, 2011).
Time frame: For the recruitment, i.e. until the number of 6 participants is reached for the second wave of the study (approximately two months after the beginning of the study)
Experiential avoidance - Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire (MEAQ ; Gamez, Chmielewski, Ruggero, Kotov, & Watson, 2011).
Time frame: The day before the beginning of the intervention
Experiential avoidance - Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire (MEAQ ; Gamez, Chmielewski, Ruggero, Kotov, & Watson, 2011).
Time frame: Once participants have completed 4 sessions of the intervention, about a week and a half after the beginning of the intervention
Experiential avoidance - Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire (MEAQ ; Gamez, Chmielewski, Ruggero, Kotov, & Watson, 2011).
Time frame: Two weeks after the end of the intervention
Experiential avoidance - Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire (MEAQ ; Gamez, Chmielewski, Ruggero, Kotov, & Watson, 2011).
Time frame: Three months after the end of the intervention
Self-Discrepancy - Self-Discrepancies Scale (S-DS; Philippot, Dethier, Baeyens, & Bouvard, 2017).
Time frame: For the recruitment, i.e. until the number of 6 participants is reached for the second wave of the study (approximately two months after the beginning of the study)
Self-Discrepancy - Self-Discrepancies Scale (S-DS; Philippot, Dethier, Baeyens, & Bouvard, 2017).
Time frame: The day before the beginning of the intervention
Self-Discrepancy - Self-Discrepancies Scale (S-DS; Philippot, Dethier, Baeyens, & Bouvard, 2017).
Time frame: Once participants have completed 4 sessions of the intervention, about a week and a half after the beginning of the intervention
Self-Discrepancy - Self-Discrepancies Scale (S-DS; Philippot, Dethier, Baeyens, & Bouvard, 2017).
Time frame: Two weeks after the end of the intervention
Self-Discrepancy - Self-Discrepancies Scale (S-DS; Philippot, Dethier, Baeyens, & Bouvard, 2017).
Time frame: Three months after the end of the intervention
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 8 Feb 2023.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Data and analyses will be available from the investigators
Related trials for Perfectionism
Recruiting
Perfectionism and Daily Coping and Emotion Regulation Processes: A Trial of Two Explanatory Feedback Interventions
Perfectionism, Psychological Well-being
RecruitingObservational study
Somatic and Psychological Profile of Athletes Across Seasonal Cycles
Eating Behavior, Perfectionism
Active, not recruiting
Metacognitive Interpersonal Therapy Across Transdiagnostic Eating Disorders, Including Underweight
Eating Disorders, Maladaptive Personality Trait
Not yet recruiting
An App to Reduce Social Media's Impact on Body Image and Eating Disorders
Anorexia Nervosa, Bulimia
Active, not recruiting
Effectiveness of the Universal Prevention Program Super Skills for Life in Schools
Social Skills, Perfectionism
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Pierre Philippot principal investigator
pierre.philippot@uclouvain.be
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing A cognitive-behavioral approach of rumination as intervention for overgeneral mode of processing in perfectionism in people with Perfectionism and Rumination - Thoughts, run by Université Catholique de Louvain at 1 site in Belgium.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 8 Feb 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Belgium. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Perfectionism - Hewitt and Flett's Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (HMPS; Hewitt & Flett,1991) (time frame: For the recruitment, i.e. until the number of 6 participants is reached for the second wave of the study (approximately two months after the beginning of the study)). The study lists 35 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 8 Feb 2023.