ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
Manipulating self and other schemas to explore psychological processes associated with paranoid beliefs: an online experimental study.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intuition criticizes self, analysis protects mother: evidence from an ERPs study.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2026Article
- A population-based cross-lagged panel network analysis of multidimensional mental health symptoms among Chinese secondary school students.BMC public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Information about the self and others is organized in cognitive-affective structures that influence and guide interpersonal behavior. These structures are referred to as relational schemas and are thought to be influenced by early interpersonal experiences with significant others leading to secure or insecure attachment patterns as adults. When insecure, these patterns appear to contribute to paranoid interpretations about the intentions of others by indirect pathways such as negative self-esteem and a bias toward untrustworthiness. Experimental studies employing classical conditioning (CC) interventions have been successful in manipulating these schemas, finding significant effects on various psychological outcomes such as attachment styles, implicit self-esteem, and paranoid beliefs. However, no study to date has explored these effects on trustworthiness judgments. Objective: This study aims to replicate the findings from previous experiments and also testing the effect of manipulating relational schemas on trustworthiness evaluations. Methods: A convenience online sample of 266 participants completed a series of tasks and questionnaires measuring attachment styles, explicit and implicit self-esteem, paranoia, and trustworthiness evaluations before and after a brief CC intervention, which involved being randomly allocated to three conditions. In each of these conditions, information about the self was always paired with either positive face stimuli (proximity-seeking condition), negative face stimuli (self-threat condition), or neutral face stimuli (control condition). Results: This study failed to replicate findings as previously reported in published experiments (i.e., self-esteem, paranoia), only finding a significant effect on attachment styles on the proximity-seeking CC condition. Moreover, no effect was found regarding trustworthiness judgments. Discussion: Limitations such as the online nature of the study and methodological aspects are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.