
Placebos have emancipated themselves from earlier, often unethical or merely research- based practices, toward an open and thereby ethical administration. Despite a plethora of efficacy studies and nearly two decades of empirical research on open-label placebos (OLPs), little to nothing is known about the circumstances under which they realize their potential. While the underlying processes of deceptive placebos are fairly well understood, these findings cannot simply be transferred to the field of OLPs, given that the two areas most probably operate through distinct mechanisms. To address this research gap, this thesis aims to identify potential explanatory forces behind OLPs. To do the unexploredness justice, a multi-method approach was adopted to shed light on the topic: A network meta-analysis of OLPs (study 1) supports the notion that OLPs can be an efficacious intervention for nonclinical and clinical populations. In particular, this study highlights the importance of inducing positive treatment expectancies, for example, by providing a treatment rationale. The mere administration of a pill without embedding it in a narrative apparently is insufficient, implying that the pill itself might not be a necessary component for OLP effects. This finding was confirmed in a three-week randomized controlled trial (study 2) in which OLPs and the sheer imagination of a pill intake both led to significantly lower test anxiety in students compared to a control group. The presence of a placebo effect solely through means of imagination implies that the daily therapeutic ritual itself evoked beneficial effects. Although these two studies provide valuable insights into OLP mechanisms, they leave the question unanswered as to which participant-related factors play a role in distinct OLP effects. Therefore, a qualitative analysis (study 3) was conducted, in which a central finding was the great extent to what an individual's desire for relief determines the magnitude of the OLP effect. OLP effects can therefore be understood ...
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
