The Effect of Processing Styles on Thought Suppression in Bipolar
Research type
Research Study
Full title
The Effect of Processing Styles on Thought Suppression in Patients with Bipolar Disorder
IRAS ID
140805
Contact name
John Geddes
Contact email
Research summary
Patients diagnosed with major depressive disorder are thought to process information in a negative way, even when they are free of symptoms. This style of information processing, known as analytical, has been shown to contribute to the severity and duration of depression. Work focused on analytical processing indicates that patients with bipolar disorder also process information in this way.
Research has shown that people with depression benefit tremendously (in terms of their symptoms) when shifting from an analytical style to an “experiential” style of processing. This shift in processing style may also have a positive impact on the severity of symptoms of people with bipolar disorder.
In this study, we are hoping to further explore the impact of processing styles on people with bipolar disorder. At two different times, we will teach participants how to process information in each style and then ask them to complete a simple task. The hope is that the results from this study will help shape future treatment methods for people with bipolar disorder.
Participants will be recruited from OXTEXT-1 Cohort as well as through Dr. John Geddes Outpatient Clinic at the Warneford Hospital. This study requires two 90-minute visits spaced three days apart. At the beginning of each visit, you will be asked to fill in baseline measures, followed by an exposure to one of two self-focus inductions, concluding with post-induction measures. The study schedule will remain identical for the second visit with the exception being participants will receive the induction they were not exposed to during the first visit. This study is being organized and funded by Oxford University Department of Psychiatry and sponsored by the University of Oxford.REC name
East Midlands - Nottingham 2 Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
14/EM/1090
Date of REC Opinion
25 Jul 2014
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion