CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT05424250Updated Jan 9, 2026

Optimizing Exposure Using Occasional Aversive Imagery in Spider Fearful Individuals

An interventional study of occasional aversive imagination and Exposure in Spider Fear and Arachnophobia, sponsored by Philipps University Marburg. Completed at 1 site in Germany. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-01-09.

Sponsored by Philipps University Marburg · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
67
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The effectiveness of an optimized extinction training is investigated in spider-fearful individuals. Participants will undergo a one-session standardized extinction training, either with or without occasional metal imagination of most feared apprehension towards spiders. The effectiveness of the training is measured by symptom improvement according to subjective ratings and behavioural avoidance tests one week later.

Read the detailed description

The present study aims to investigate the applicability of an optimized exposure training using imagination. Exposure training is an effective approach to the treatment of various anxiety disorders. However, there are a significant number of patients who do not benefit or who develop anxiety following successful treatment. The process of extinction underlying exposure is the focus of current research on optimizing exposure. In this regard, one promising approach for improving extinction learning involves the occasional presentation of fear-generating stimuli (unconditioned stimuli [US]; often an electrical stimulus in experimental studies) during extinction (occasional reinforced extinction, ORE). Previous experimental studies provide preliminary evidence for a less pronounced return of fear after extinction training with occasional presentation of the US. In clinical practice, this strategy is recommended to optimize extinction learning in the treatment of individuals with anxiety. However, the transfer of the procedure used (real presentation of an unconditioned stimulus) into clinical practice seems difficult to realize. One way to facilitate the transfer of the ORE approach into clinical practice could be the use of vivid imagination of a personally relevant fear-generating situation during extinction training/exposure (e.g., patients' central concerns). Therefore, the aim of the present study is to examine the applicability of ORE using imagination. In this context, a standardized extinction training either with or without mental imagination of a personally relevant fear situation (e.g., central concern of the consequences when confronted with spiders) will be performed in individuals with spider-fearful individuals. The approach used for individuals with spider fear is well established and has been successfully implemented in previous studies by instructed trainers (e.g., individuals with a bachelor's degree in psychology). The aim of this randomized controlled trial in healthy individuals with increased fear of spiders is to investigate whether optimized extinction training (extinction training + imagination) is more effective in reducing fear of spiders in the long term compared to standard extinction training.

02

Conditions studied

  • Spider Fear
  • Arachnophobia
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Elevated score on Spider Phobia Questionnaire (SPQ) > 17

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Severe allergies to bees/spiders/insects
  • current psychotherapeutic/psychiatric treatment
  • past psychotherapeutic/psychiatric treatment due to anxiety problems
  • current or past psychotic symptoms
  • current suicidal intent
  • experience with exposure-based treatment
  • current psychopharmacological medication
  • severe cardiovascular, respiratory or neurological diseases
04

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Triple (Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
67 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Exposure + occasional aversive imagination

    repeated imaginations of the participants' most feared apprehension during extinction training with seven standardized exposure steps

    Behavioral: occasional aversive imagination · Behavioral: Exposure

  • Active comparator
    Exposure

    Standard extinction training with seven standardized exposure steps

    Behavioral: Exposure

Interventions

  • Behavioraloccasional aversive imagination

    During six of the 27 exposure trials, participants in the experimental group are asked to imagine their most feared outcome towards spiders as vividly as possible while completing the specific trial.

  • BehavioralExposure

    • All participants complete an exposure training session (approx. 75 min) with seven exposure steps, which are repeated between one and five times (e.g. Step 4: directing the spider with a pen by touching its legs at least five times per repetition; this step must be repeated five times before continuing to the next step). One repetition per step is considered one trial, therefore each participant aims to complete 27 exposure trials.

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Spider Phobia Questionnaire (SPQ)

    31-item true/false questionnaire assessing symptoms of arachnophobia. Scores range from 0 to 31, with greater scores representing greater fear of spiders. Spider phobic individuals have obtained mean scores of 23.20 (SD = 2.90) and 23.76 (SD = 3.80) on the SPQ.

    Time frame: Change from baseline to post-treatment (i.e., 7-9 days)

  2. Behavioral Approach Test (BAT)

    Number of test steps fully completed (0-14 steps)

    Time frame: Change from baseline to post-treatment (i.e., 7-9 days)

  3. Fear rating

    Maximum fear rating on a scale from 0 (no fear) to 100 (severe fear) recorded once during BAT

    Time frame: Change from baseline to post-treatment (i.e., 7-9 days)

Secondary outcomes

  1. Fear of Spider Questionnaire (FSQ)

    14-item questionnaire on a 7-point Likert scale (0 = 'I don't agree at all'; 6 = 'I completely agree') assessing symptoms of arachnophobia. Total score range: 0 to 84. Higher scores indicate worse severity of arachnophobia.

    Time frame: Change from baseline to post-treatment (i.e., 7-9 days)

  2. Change in anxiety sensitivity (ASI-3)

    The Anxiety Sensitivity Index (ASI-3) is a self-report measure of fear of anxiety-related body symptoms (i.e., anxiety sensitivity). Total score range: 0 to 72. Higher scores indicate worse anxiety sensitivity.

    Time frame: change from baseline to post-treatment (i.e. 7-9 days)

  3. PROMIS Emotional Distress-Anxiety-Short Form

    The DSM-5-TR Level 2-Anxiety-Adult measure is the 7-item PROMIS Anxiety Short Form that assesses the pure domain of anxiety in individuals age 18 and older. Each item on the measure is rated on a 5-point scale (1=never; 2=rarely; 3=sometimes; 4=often; and 5=always) with a range in score from 7 to 35 with higher scores indicating greater severity of anxiety.

    Time frame: change from baseline to post-treatment (i.e. 7-9 days)

  4. US expectancy and fear ratings

    Ratings of US expectancy and fear during exposure training on a scale from 0 (I don't expect my feared outcome/I am not scared at this moment) to 100 (I completely expect my feared outcome to happen/I am severely scared at this moment). Specifically, we asked participants to rate their US expectancy and fear before and during each of the 27 trials.

    Time frame: Baseline

06

Study locations

1 site
  • Philipps-University Marburg
    Marburg, Hesse 35037, Germany
07

References and documents

Publications

  • Craske MG, Treanor M, Conway CC, Zbozinek T, Vervliet B. Maximizing exposure therapy: an inhibitory learning approach. Behav Res Ther. 2014 Jul;58:10-23. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2014.04.006. Epub 2014 May 9. PubMed 24864005 ↗
  • Culver NC, Stevens S, Fanselow MS, Craske MG. Building physiological toughness: Some aversive events during extinction may attenuate return of fear. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2018 Mar;58:18-28. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2017.07.003. Epub 2017 Jul 25. PubMed 28777975 ↗
  • Lipp OV, Ryan KM, Luck CC, Craske MG, Waters AM. Presentation of unpaired unconditional stimuli during extinction reduces renewal of conditional fear and slows re-acquisition. Psychophysiology. 2021 Oct;58(10):e13899. doi: 10.1111/psyp.13899. Epub 2021 Jul 6. PubMed 34231228 ↗
  • Shiban Y, Wittmann J, Weissinger M, Muhlberger A. Gradual extinction reduces reinstatement. Front Behav Neurosci. 2015 Sep 15;9:254. doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00254. eCollection 2015. PubMed 26441581 ↗
  • Thompson A, McEvoy PM, Lipp OV. Enhancing extinction learning: Occasional presentations of the unconditioned stimulus during extinction eliminate spontaneous recovery, but not necessarily reacquisition of fear. Behav Res Ther. 2018 Sep;108:29-39. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2018.07.001. Epub 2018 Jul 3. PubMed 29981936 ↗
08

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05424250
Lead sponsor
Philipps University Marburg
Responsible party
Christoph Benke (Principal Investigator, Philipps University Marburg) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jun 21, 2022
Start date
Jun 15, 2022
Primary completion
Jul 31, 2023
Completion
Sep 30, 2023
Last update
Jan 9, 2026

Study contacts

Christoph Benke, PhD
principal investigator · Philipps University Marburg
Christiane Pané-Farré, PhD
principal investigator · Philipps University Marburg
Dorothee Scheuermann, M.Sc.
principal investigator · Philipps University Marburg

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jan 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion