Gratitude + No ExpectationsNCT03784001
The Effects of Manipulating Expectations in a Gratitude Intervention
A study testing Gratitude + No Expectations Intervention and Gratitude + Expectations Intervention in people with Gratitude + No Expectations and Gratitude + Expectations, run by University of California, Los Angeles at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Gratitude - an emotion felt when an individual receives something beneficial from other people or entities - has been shown to positively affect well-being. Beginning in 2003, "count your blessings" interventions - in which participants list items they are grateful for, and gratitude letter writing interventions were… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Gratitude + No Expectations, Gratitude + Expectations, Events Control
- What is being tested?
- Gratitude + No Expectations Intervention and Gratitude + Expectations Intervention
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 125 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 5 Feb 2019to 28 Feb 2019
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
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
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Undergraduate Student
- Proficient in English
- 18 years of age or older
- Has a valid email address
- Access to the internet
Who cannot join
- -No other exclusion criteria (aside from meeting the inclusion criteria above)
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Cultivating Gratitude: Does Manipulating Expectations Improve the Efficacy of a Gratitude Intervention?
Gratitude - an emotion felt when an individual receives something beneficial from other people or entities - has been shown to positively affect well-being. Beginning in 2003, "count your blessings" interventions - in which participants list items they are grateful for, and gratitude letter writing interventions were designed to cultivate gratitude. Gratitude interventions have many positive outcomes; they can increase well-being and life satisfaction (Froh, Sefick, \& Emmons, 2008) and increase self-esteem (Rash, Matsuba, \& Prkachin, 2011) to name a few.
Knowing the benefits of gratitude prior to an intervention could affect participant behavior and health outcomes. Past studies have illustrated that sharing information about treatments changes expectations and improves outcomes (Zion \& Crum, 2018). For instance, overt medical treatments are more effective than hidden ones (Colloca, Lopiano, Lanotte, \& Benedetti, 2004).
Read more
The proposed study is designed to evaluate whether expectations about intervention efficacy can enhance the benefits of a brief gratitude intervention. Specifically, the investigators will test if providing information on the benefits of gratitude will enhance intervention outcomes. This 3-armed randomized controlled trial will have the following conditions: gratitude + expectation, gratitude, and events control. Participants will be undergraduate college students and the online intervention will last two weeks.
Participants in the two gratitude conditions will login to an online form three times a week for two weeks and make entries of up to five things they are grateful for. The form for participants in the gratitude + expectation condition will also provide information about benefits of gratitude. An everyday events control will be used to provide a neutral comparison condition. This group will be instructed to type up to five things or events of note from their day on their form.
Outcome measures will be collected via an online survey before and immediately after the intervention. The primary outcome is well-being and the secondary outcomes are sleep quality and quantity, state gratitude, positive affect, healthcare self-efficacy, stress, and depressive symptoms. The investigators predict that participants in the gratitude + expectation condition will have enhanced intervention outcomes compared to participants in comparison conditions.
Read the detailed description
Overview: Potential participants will be recruited from an undergraduate psychology class. Participants will have one week after initial study advertisement to read the consent form and decide if they wish to participate. When participants turn in a signed consent form, they will be officially enrolled in the study and issued a personal identification (PI) number to use throughout the study.
Participants will be randomly assigned to one of three conditions: gratitude + expectations, gratitude, or an everyday events control condition. Participants will be emailed six different times, once every two days, with a link to an anonymous Google form. Each Google form will instruct participants to type either a short gratitude list (for gratitude + expectations and gratitude conditions) or an events list (for everyday events control), and will have a section for participants to enter their personal identification numbers. Additionally, the first form will include a demographics questionnaire and the first and sixth forms will include questionnaires assessing all outcomes of interest.The primary outcome of interest is well-being. The secondary outcomes of interest are sleep, state gratitude, healthcare self-efficacy, stress, and depressive symptoms.
Participants in the gratitude + expectations condition will have a statement at the top of their Google form about the benefits of gratitude. Examples of these statements are: "Practicing gratitude may increase social connectedness" and "Cultivating gratitude was shown to improve school satisfaction in a sample of students". By the end of the study, participants will have completed six gratitude or everyday events lists and two questionnaires.
Interventions:
- Gratitude + No Expectations: Participants in the gratitude condition will practice a counting your blessings intervention for two weeks. Participants will be instructed to list up to five things they are grateful for every two days for the two weeks of the intervention (six times total).
- Gratitude + expectations: Participants in this condition will be given the same instructions as the gratitude condition and will also be given the regular reminders of the benefits of gratitude.
- Everyday events: Participants will be instructed to list up to five details about their day, such as activities they engaged in, or conversations they had. Participants will make these lists every two days for two weeks (six times total).
Questionnaires:
Self-report questionnaires with high test-retest reliability and internal validity will be administered at baseline and post intervention to access changes in outcomes of interest, such as well-being, depressive symptoms, and anxiety.
Questionnaires administered only at baseline: Communication and Attitudinal Self-Efficacy Scale (CASE) and demographic questionnaire
Questionnaires administered pre- and post-intervention: Mental Health Continuum-Short Form, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Sleep Disturbance Scale, Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) duration items, Modified Differential Emotions Scale, Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), Perceived Stress Scale 4
- Being tested
- Gratitude + No Expectations Intervention, Gratitude + Expectations Intervention, Events Control Intervention
- Keywords
- Gratitude, Expectations, Well-being
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Gratitude + No Expectations InterventionBehavioural
Participants will be emailed six different times, once every two days, with a link to an anonymous Google form. Each Google form will instruct participants to type a short gratitude list of up to five items. Additionally, the first form will include a demographics questionnaire and the first and sixth forms will include questionnaires assessing all outcomes of interest
Gratitude + Expectations InterventionBehavioural
Participants will be emailed six different times, once every two days, with a link to an anonymous Google form. Each Google form will instruct participants to type a short gratitude list of up to five items. Participants will have a statement at the top of their Google form about the benefits of gratitude. Examples of these statements are: "Practicing gratitude may increase social connectedness" and "Cultivating gratitude was shown to improve school satisfaction in a UK sample of students". Additionally, the first form will include a demographics questionnaire and the first and sixth forms will include questionnaires assessing all outcomes of interest
Events Control InterventionBehavioural
Participants will be emailed six different times, once every two days, with a link to an anonymous Google form. Each Google form will instruct participants to type a list of up to five items about events from their day. Additionally, the first form will include a demographics questionnaire and the first and sixth forms will include questionnaires assessing all outcomes of interest.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Gratitude + No Expectations | Active comparator | Participants will type online lists of up to five items they are grateful for, every two days for two weeks. Receives: Behavioral: Gratitude + No Expectations Intervention |
| Gratitude + Expectations | Experimental | Participants will type online lists of up to five items they are grateful for, every two days for two weeks. They will also be told a benefit of gratitude each time they write an online gratitude list. Receives: Behavioral: Gratitude + Expectations Intervention |
| Events Control | Active comparator | Participants will type online lists of up to five events from their day, every two day for two weeks. Receives: Behavioral: Events Control Intervention |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF)
Hedonic well-being, eudaimonic well-being, and overall well-being were assessed at baseline and post-intervention. Well-being was measured with the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF; Keyes, 2009). Participants rated how often they felt 14 different emotions or statements, such as "happy" and "satisfied with life". Items are rated on a 6-point likert scale (0 = never, 5 = everyday). This measure assesses both hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. The MHC-SF is both reliable and valid for use with young adults (Robitschek \& Keyes, 2009). Total scores are created by the sum of scores for all 14 items, with a range of 0-70. Higher scores indicate greater overall well-being.
Measured: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF): Hedonic Well-Being SubScale
Well-being was measured with the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF; Keyes, 2009). Participants rated how often they felt 14 different emotions or statements, such as "happy" and "satisfied with life". Items are rated on a 6-point likert scale (0 = never, 5 = everyday), with higher numbers indicating greater well-being. This measure assesses both hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. The MHC-SF is both reliable and valid for use with young adults (Robitschek \& Keyes, 2009). The Hedonic Well-Being Subscale is the sum of items 1-3 on the Mental Health Continuum Short-Form. Total scores range from 0-15, with higher scores indicating greater hedonic well-being. Scoring a 4 or 5 on at least one of the 3 items on the Hedonic Well-Being Subscale indicates a diagnosis of flourishing mental health.
Measured: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF): Eudaimonic Well-Being SubScale
Well-being was measured with the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF; Keyes, 2009). Participants rated how often they felt 14 different emotions or statements, such as "happy" and "satisfied with life". Items are rated on a 6-point likert scale (0 = never, 5 = everyday), with higher numbers indicating greater well-being. This measure assesses both hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. The MHC-SF is both reliable and valid for use with young adults (Robitschek \& Keyes, 2009). The score of the Eudaimonic Subscale is the sum of items 4-14 on the MHC-SF. Scores range from 0-55. Higher scores indicate greater eudaimonic well-being (i.e., greater social and psychological well-being).
Measured: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Secondary outcomes (6)
Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Sleep Disturbance Scale
Sleep quality was measured with the 8-item PROMIS sleep disturbance short form (Yu et al., 2012). Participants rated their level of agreement with eight different statements about their sleep in the past seven days such as "My sleep was restless" and "I had difficulty falling asleep". Participants rated each item on a 5 point scale (1 = not at all, 5 = very much). Items 2, 3, 7, and 8 were reverse scored. The total score of the PROMIS Sleep Disturbance Scale is the sum of the scores for all 8 items. Total scores range from 8-40, with higher scores indicating more severe sleep disturbance.
Measured: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) Duration Items
Sleep quantity was measured with the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index Duration Items (PSQI-4), which asks participants questions such as when they went to bed and when they woke up in the morning (Buysse et al., 1989). PSQI duration items are questions 1-4 on the PSQI, which measure how much sleep respondents have been getting. Higher hours of sleep is a better outcome.
Measured: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Modified Differential Emotions Scale (MDES): Positive Emotions Subscale
Positive affect was measured with the ten-item Positive Emotions (PE) subscale of the Modified Differential Emotions Scale (mDES) (Fredrickson, Tugade, Waugh, and Larkin, 2003). Participants rated how often they felt ten different groups of positive emotions such as "amused, fun-loving, silly" on a 5-point scale (0 = not at all, 4 = most of the time). The average of the items was calculated to measure positive affect, with higher numbers indicating greater positive affect.
Measured: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Perceived Stress Scale - 4 (PSS-4)
Stress was measured with the 4-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4; Cohen, Kamarack, and Mermelstein, 1983). Participants rated how often they felt a certain way in the last week on four different items such as "How often have you felt confident about your ability to handle your personal problems?" and "How often have you felt that things were going your way?" on a 5- point scale (0 = never, 4 = very often). The total score of the PSS-4 is the sum of all 4 items. Total scores range from 0-16, and higher scores indicate greater perceived stress.
Measured: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D)
Depressive symptoms were measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies - Depression Scale (CES-D, Radloff, 1977). Participants rated how often they experienced 20 different statements such as "I was bothered by things that usually don't bother me" and "I felt like everything I did was an effort" in the past week. Participants scored each item on a 4-point scale (0 = rarely or none of the time 3 = all of the time). The total score for the CES-D is the sum of all 20 items, with a range of 0-60, with higher scores indicating greater depressive symptoms.
Measured: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Modified Differential Emotions Scale (MDES): State Gratitude
State gratitude was measured with item one of the mDES (Fredrickson, Tugade, Waugh, and Larkin, 2003), which asks participants how often they felt "grateful, appreciative, or thankful" in the past two weeks. Participants rated this item on a 5-point scale (0 = not at all, 4 = most of the time), with a higher number indicating higher feelings of gratitude.
Measured: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted21 Dec 2018
- Study start5 Feb 2019
- Primary completion28 Feb 2019
- Study completion28 Feb 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (10)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Gratitude + No ExpectationsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of California, Los AngelesThe 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
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Participants will be randomly assigned to one of three conditions: Gratitude, Gratitude + Expectations, or Events Control Participants in the two gratitude conditions will login to an online Google form three times a week for two weeks and make entries of up to five things they are grateful for. The form for participants in the gratitude + expectation condition will also provide information about benefits of gratitude. An everyday events control will be used to provide a neutral comparison condition. This group will be instructed to type up to five things or events of note from their day on their form.
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 125 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, Los Angeles
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Tanera van Diggelen, University of California, Los Angeles
- Investigators
- Tanera van Diggelen, Principal investigator, University of California, Los Angeles
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03784001
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 1997
- Status last verified
- May 2020
- First submitted
- 19 Dec 2018
- Last updated
- 9 Jun 2020
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Froh JJ, Sefick WJ, Emmons RA. Counting blessings in early adolescents: an experimental study of gratitude and subjective well-being. J Sch Psychol. 2008 Apr;46(2):213-33. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2007.03.005. Epub 2007 May 4.
PubMed 19083358Bartlett MY, DeSteno D. Gratitude and prosocial behavior: helping when it costs you. Psychol Sci. 2006 Apr;17(4):319-25. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01705.x.
PubMed 16623689Watkins, P., Woodward, K., Stone, T., & Kolts, R. (2003). Gratitude and happiness: Development of a measure of gratitude and relationships with subjective well-being. Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 31, 431-452. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2003.31.5.431
Kruse, E., Chancellor, J., Ruberton, P.M., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2014). An upward spiral between gratitude and humility. Social Psychological and Personality Science. 5(7), 805-814. doi: 10.1177/1948550614534700
Rash, J. A., Matsuba, M. K., & Prkachin, K. M. (2011). Gratitude and well-being: who benefits the most from a gratitude intervention? Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 3(3), 350-369. doi: 10.1111/j.1758-0854.2011.01058.x
Zion SR, Crum AJ. Mindsets Matter: A New Framework for Harnessing the Placebo Effect in Modern Medicine. Int Rev Neurobiol. 2018;138:137-160. doi: 10.1016/bs.irn.2018.02.002. Epub 2018 Mar 20.
PubMed 29681322Colloca L, Lopiano L, Lanotte M, Benedetti F. Overt versus covert treatment for pain, anxiety, and Parkinson's disease. Lancet Neurol. 2004 Nov;3(11):679-84. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(04)00908-1.
PubMed 15488461Emmons RA, McCullough ME. Counting blessings versus burdens: an experimental investigation of gratitude and subjective well-being in daily life. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003 Feb;84(2):377-89. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.84.2.377.
PubMed 12585811Sheldon, K.M. & Lyubomirsky, S. 2006. How to increase and sustain positive emotion: The effects of expressing gratitude and visualizing best possible selves. The Journal of Positive Psychology. 1(2). 73-82. doi:10.1080/17439760500510676
Jackowska M, Brown J, Ronaldson A, Steptoe A. The impact of a brief gratitude intervention on subjective well-being, biology and sleep. J Health Psychol. 2016 Oct;21(10):2207-17. doi: 10.1177/1359105315572455. Epub 2015 Mar 2.
PubMed 25736389
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 9 Jun 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Cultivating Gratitude: Does Manipulating Expectations Improve the Efficacy of a Gratitude Intervention?
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03784001
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 1997
- Keywords
- Gratitude, Expectations, Well-being
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 125 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, Los AngelesUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 5 Feb 2019 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 28 Feb 2019 (actual)
- Study completion
- 28 Feb 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 21 Dec 2018 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 9 Jun 2020
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Gratitude - an emotion felt when an individual receives something beneficial from other people or entities - has been shown to positively affect well-being. Beginning in 2003, "count your blessings" interventions - in which participants list items they are grateful for, and gratitude letter writing interventions were designed to cultivate gratitude. Gratitude interventions have many positive outcomes; they can increase well-being and life satisfaction (Froh, Sefick, \& Emmons, 2008) and increase self-esteem (Rash, Matsuba, \& Prkachin, 2011) to name a few.
Knowing the benefits of gratitude prior to an intervention could affect participant behavior and health outcomes. Past studies have illustrated that sharing information about treatments changes expectations and improves outcomes (Zion \& Crum, 2018). For instance, overt medical treatments are more effective than hidden ones (Colloca, Lopiano, Lanotte, \& Benedetti, 2004).
The proposed study is designed to evaluate whether expectations about intervention efficacy can enhance the benefits of a brief gratitude intervention. Specifically, the investigators will test if providing information on the benefits of gratitude will enhance intervention outcomes. This 3-armed randomized controlled trial will have the following conditions: gratitude + expectation, gratitude, and events control. Participants will be undergraduate college students and the online intervention will last two weeks.
Participants in the two gratitude conditions will login to an online form three times a week for two weeks and make entries of up to five things they are grateful for. The form for participants in the gratitude + expectation condition will also provide information about benefits of gratitude. An everyday events control will be used to provide a neutral comparison condition. This group will be instructed to type up to five things or events of note from their day on their form.
Outcome measures will be collected via an online survey before and immediately after the intervention. The primary outcome is well-being and the secondary outcomes are sleep quality and quantity, state gratitude, positive affect, healthcare self-efficacy, stress, and depressive symptoms. The investigators predict that participants in the gratitude + expectation condition will have enhanced intervention outcomes compared to participants in comparison conditions.
Detailed description
Overview: Potential participants will be recruited from an undergraduate psychology class. Participants will have one week after initial study advertisement to read the consent form and decide if they wish to participate. When participants turn in a signed consent form, they will be officially enrolled in the study and issued a personal identification (PI) number to use throughout the study.
Participants will be randomly assigned to one of three conditions: gratitude + expectations, gratitude, or an everyday events control condition. Participants will be emailed six different times, once every two days, with a link to an anonymous Google form. Each Google form will instruct participants to type either a short gratitude list (for gratitude + expectations and gratitude conditions) or an events list (for everyday events control), and will have a section for participants to enter their personal identification numbers. Additionally, the first form will include a demographics questionnaire and the first and sixth forms will include questionnaires assessing all outcomes of interest.The primary outcome of interest is well-being. The secondary outcomes of interest are sleep, state gratitude, healthcare self-efficacy, stress, and depressive symptoms.
Participants in the gratitude + expectations condition will have a statement at the top of their Google form about the benefits of gratitude. Examples of these statements are: "Practicing gratitude may increase social connectedness" and "Cultivating gratitude was shown to improve school satisfaction in a sample of students". By the end of the study, participants will have completed six gratitude or everyday events lists and two questionnaires.
Interventions:
- Gratitude + No Expectations: Participants in the gratitude condition will practice a counting your blessings intervention for two weeks. Participants will be instructed to list up to five things they are grateful for every two days for the two weeks of the intervention (six times total).
- Gratitude + expectations: Participants in this condition will be given the same instructions as the gratitude condition and will also be given the regular reminders of the benefits of gratitude.
- Everyday events: Participants will be instructed to list up to five details about their day, such as activities they engaged in, or conversations they had. Participants will make these lists every two days for two weeks (six times total).
Questionnaires:
Self-report questionnaires with high test-retest reliability and internal validity will be administered at baseline and post intervention to access changes in outcomes of interest, such as well-being, depressive symptoms, and anxiety.
Questionnaires administered only at baseline: Communication and Attitudinal Self-Efficacy Scale (CASE) and demographic questionnaire
Questionnaires administered pre- and post-intervention: Mental Health Continuum-Short Form, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Sleep Disturbance Scale, Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) duration items, Modified Differential Emotions Scale, Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), Perceived Stress Scale 4
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 3
- Model description
- Participants will be randomly assigned to one of three conditions: Gratitude, Gratitude + Expectations, or Events Control Participants in the two gratitude conditions will login to an online Google form three times a week for two weeks and make entries of up to five things they are grateful for. The form for participants in the gratitude + expectation condition will also provide information about benefits of gratitude. An everyday events control will be used to provide a neutral comparison condition. This group will be instructed to type up to five things or events of note from their day on their form.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Gratitude + No Expectations | Active comparator | Behavioral: Gratitude + No Expectations InterventionParticipants will type online lists of up to five items they are grateful for, every two days for two weeks. |
| Gratitude + Expectations | Experimental | Behavioral: Gratitude + Expectations InterventionParticipants will type online lists of up to five items they are grateful for, every two days for two weeks. They will also be told a benefit of gratitude each time they write an online gratitude list. |
| Events Control | Active comparator | Behavioral: Events Control InterventionParticipants will type online lists of up to five events from their day, every two day for two weeks. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Undergraduate Student
- Proficient in English
- 18 years of age or older
- Has a valid email address
- Access to the internet
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- -No other exclusion criteria (aside from meeting the inclusion criteria above)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Gratitude + No Expectations InterventionParticipants will be emailed six different times, once every two days, with a link to an anonymous Google form. Each Google form will instruct participants to type a short gratitude list of up to five items. Additionally, the first form will include a demographics questionnaire and the first and sixth forms will include questionnaires assessing all outcomes of interest | Behavioural | Gratitude + No Expectations |
| Gratitude + Expectations InterventionParticipants will be emailed six different times, once every two days, with a link to an anonymous Google form. Each Google form will instruct participants to type a short gratitude list of up to five items. Participants will have a statement at the top of their Google form about the benefits of gratitude. Examples of these statements are: "Practicing gratitude may increase social connectedness" and "Cultivating gratitude was shown to improve school satisfaction in a UK sample of students". Additionally, the first form will include a demographics questionnaire and the first and sixth forms will include questionnaires assessing all outcomes of interest | Behavioural | Gratitude + Expectations |
| Events Control InterventionParticipants will be emailed six different times, once every two days, with a link to an anonymous Google form. Each Google form will instruct participants to type a list of up to five items about events from their day. Additionally, the first form will include a demographics questionnaire and the first and sixth forms will include questionnaires assessing all outcomes of interest. | Behavioural | Events Control |
Primary outcome
Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF)
Time frame: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Hedonic well-being, eudaimonic well-being, and overall well-being were assessed at baseline and post-intervention. Well-being was measured with the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF; Keyes, 2009). Participants rated how often they felt 14 different emotions or statements, such as "happy" and "satisfied with life". Items are rated on a 6-point likert scale (0 = never, 5 = everyday). This measure assesses both hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. The MHC-SF is both reliable and valid for use with young adults (Robitschek \& Keyes, 2009). Total scores are created by the sum of scores for all 14 items, with a range of 0-70. Higher scores indicate greater overall well-being.
Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF): Hedonic Well-Being SubScale
Time frame: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Well-being was measured with the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF; Keyes, 2009). Participants rated how often they felt 14 different emotions or statements, such as "happy" and "satisfied with life". Items are rated on a 6-point likert scale (0 = never, 5 = everyday), with higher numbers indicating greater well-being. This measure assesses both hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. The MHC-SF is both reliable and valid for use with young adults (Robitschek \& Keyes, 2009). The Hedonic Well-Being Subscale is the sum of items 1-3 on the Mental Health Continuum Short-Form. Total scores range from 0-15, with higher scores indicating greater hedonic well-being. Scoring a 4 or 5 on at least one of the 3 items on the Hedonic Well-Being Subscale indicates a diagnosis of flourishing mental health.
Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF): Eudaimonic Well-Being SubScale
Time frame: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Well-being was measured with the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF; Keyes, 2009). Participants rated how often they felt 14 different emotions or statements, such as "happy" and "satisfied with life". Items are rated on a 6-point likert scale (0 = never, 5 = everyday), with higher numbers indicating greater well-being. This measure assesses both hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. The MHC-SF is both reliable and valid for use with young adults (Robitschek \& Keyes, 2009). The score of the Eudaimonic Subscale is the sum of items 4-14 on the MHC-SF. Scores range from 0-55. Higher scores indicate greater eudaimonic well-being (i.e., greater social and psychological well-being).
6 secondary outcomes
Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Sleep Disturbance Scale
Time frame: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) Duration Items
Time frame: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Modified Differential Emotions Scale (MDES): Positive Emotions Subscale
Time frame: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Perceived Stress Scale - 4 (PSS-4)
Time frame: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D)
Time frame: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Modified Differential Emotions Scale (MDES): State Gratitude
Time frame: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 9 Jun 2020.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 19083358Froh JJ, Sefick WJ, Emmons RA. Counting blessings in early adolescents: an experimental study of gratitude and subjective well-being. J Sch Psychol. 2008 Apr;46(2):213-33. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2007.03.005. Epub 2007 May 4.
- Background: PubMed 16623689Bartlett MY, DeSteno D. Gratitude and prosocial behavior: helping when it costs you. Psychol Sci. 2006 Apr;17(4):319-25. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01705.x.
- BackgroundWatkins, P., Woodward, K., Stone, T., & Kolts, R. (2003). Gratitude and happiness: Development of a measure of gratitude and relationships with subjective well-being. Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 31, 431-452. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2003.31.5.431
- BackgroundKruse, E., Chancellor, J., Ruberton, P.M., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2014). An upward spiral between gratitude and humility. Social Psychological and Personality Science. 5(7), 805-814. doi: 10.1177/1948550614534700
- BackgroundRash, J. A., Matsuba, M. K., & Prkachin, K. M. (2011). Gratitude and well-being: who benefits the most from a gratitude intervention? Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 3(3), 350-369. doi: 10.1111/j.1758-0854.2011.01058.x
- Background: PubMed 29681322Zion SR, Crum AJ. Mindsets Matter: A New Framework for Harnessing the Placebo Effect in Modern Medicine. Int Rev Neurobiol. 2018;138:137-160. doi: 10.1016/bs.irn.2018.02.002. Epub 2018 Mar 20.
- Background: PubMed 15488461Colloca L, Lopiano L, Lanotte M, Benedetti F. Overt versus covert treatment for pain, anxiety, and Parkinson's disease. Lancet Neurol. 2004 Nov;3(11):679-84. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(04)00908-1.
- Background: PubMed 12585811Emmons RA, McCullough ME. Counting blessings versus burdens: an experimental investigation of gratitude and subjective well-being in daily life. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003 Feb;84(2):377-89. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.84.2.377.
- BackgroundSheldon, K.M. & Lyubomirsky, S. 2006. How to increase and sustain positive emotion: The effects of expressing gratitude and visualizing best possible selves. The Journal of Positive Psychology. 1(2). 73-82. doi:10.1080/17439760500510676
- Background: PubMed 25736389Jackowska M, Brown J, Ronaldson A, Steptoe A. The impact of a brief gratitude intervention on subjective well-being, biology and sleep. J Health Psychol. 2016 Oct;21(10):2207-17. doi: 10.1177/1359105315572455. Epub 2015 Mar 2.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
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.
Tanera van Diggelen principal investigator
University of California, Los Angeles
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Gratitude + No Expectations Intervention and Gratitude + Expectations Intervention in people with Gratitude + No Expectations and Gratitude + Expectations, run by University of California, Los Angeles at 1 site in United States.
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 5 inclusion and 1 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 9 Jun 2020. 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 United States. 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?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 9 Jun 2020). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
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?
Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF) (time frame: Assessed at Pre- and Post- Intervention (2 weeks apart)). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03784001, which also lists 10 linked publications.
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 9 Jun 2020.