Skip to main content
. 2019 Apr 15;10:242. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00242

Table 2.

Studies investigating the role of the experimenter/clinician characteristics (sex and status).

Study Design N (Female) Sample Type of provider Characteristics Target outcome Result
Egbert et al. (46) Between subjects 97 (63) Abdominal surgery patients Clinicians Status (confidence) Narcotic usage, physical and emotional status, postoperative pain intensity Confident clinicians induced less postoperative narcotics and a better physical and emotional condition.
Otto and Dougher (47) Between subjects 80 (40) Healthy participants Experimenters (2 M and 2 F) Experimenter sex Pain intensity No significant effect of experimenter sex
Levine and De Simone (19) Mixed design 68 (33) Healthy participants Experimenters (1 M and 1 F) Experimenter sex Pain intensity Female experimenters induced lower pain intensity in male subjects.
Feine et al. (48) Between subjects 20 (20) Healthy participants Experimenters (1 F and 1 M) Experimenter sex Pain intensity No significant effect
Bush et al. (49) Between subjects 47 (24) Orofacial pain patients Experimenters (1 F and 1 M) Experimenter sex Pain intensity No significant effect
Fillingim et al. (50) Between subjects 209 (117) Healthy participants Experimenters (1 M and 1 F) Experimenter and participant sex Pain thresholds Female experimenters induced higher pain thresholds in both male and female subjects.
Carter et al. (51) Between subjects 80 (40) Healthy participants Experimenters (not reported) Experimenter sex Pain tolerance, electrocardiogram Female experimenters induced lower electromyogram activity and higher pain tolerance in male and female subjects.
Kállai et al. (22) Mixed design 160 (80) Healthy participants Experimenters (4 M and 4 F) Status (professional or informal)
Experimenter sex
Pain threshold, pain intensity, pain tolerance Professional experimenters generated higher pain tolerance in participants.
Experimenters induced higher pain tolerance in an opposite sex participant.
Female experimenters induced higher pain intensity in male and female subjects.
Thorn et al. (52) Correlation 219 (129) Healthy participants Experimenters (1 M and 1 F) Experimenter sex Pain intensity and tolerance No significant effects.
Essick et al. (53) Between subjects 34 (17) Healthy participants Experimenters (1 M and 1 F) Experimenter sex Pain sensitivity No significant effect.
Gijsbers and Nicholson (54) Between subjects 64 (32) Healthy participants Experimenters (1 M and 1 F) Experimenter gender Pain threshold Female experimenters induced higher pain thresholds in male subjects.
Campbell et al. (26) Between subjects 117 (117) Healthy participants Experimenters Status (university professor or a graduate assistant) Blood pressure response, pain tolerance, and unpleasantness Professors generated higher blood pressure responsivity, higher pain tolerance, and lower pain unpleasantness in subjects.
Aslaksen et al. (25) Mixed design 64 (32) Healthy participants Experimenters (3 M and 3 F) Experimenter and participants gender Pain intensity, heart rate, and skin conductance Female experimenters induced lower pain reports in male subjects.
Williams et al. (55) Correlation 70 (41) Low back pain patients Clinicians Status (a clinician or an assistant) Pain intensity recollection after an injection Clinicians generated recalled-pain ratings in patients that correlated the ratings presented following the procedure.
Assistants generated higher pain ratings than their original ratings.
Aslaksen and Flaten (56) Within subjects 63 (32) Healthy participants Experimenters (4 M and 4 F) Experimenter gender Pain intensity, placebo, stress, arousal, mood Male experimenters induced higher placebo responses in male subjects.
Kaptchuk et al. (57) Between subjects 262 (199) Patients with IBS Clinicians Status (a placebo acupuncture augmented by confidence VS a placebo acupuncture alone—limited—and a waiting list) Placebo, global improvement, adequate relief, symptom severity, quality of life Confident clinicians generated higher global improvement, adequate relief of symptoms, better quality of life, and lower symptom severity scores in participants.
Weimer et al. (58) Between subjects 64 (32) Healthy participants Experimenters (1 M and 1 F) Experimenter sex Placebo, nausea No interaction between experimenter sex and placebo responses.
Vigil et al. (59) Mixed design 352 (169) Healthy participants Experimenters (7 M and 7 F and 1 T) Experimenter gender (and a transgendered experimenter with a feminine status), participant gender Pain intensity Male experimenters induced lower pain intensity in both male and female subjects.
Transgendered experimenters induced higher pain intensity in female subjects.
Vigil and Alcock (60) Correlation 199 (86) Pain patients Clinicians (not reported) Experimenter gender Pain intensity Both sex patients presented higher pain levels to female clinicians.
Sorge et al. (61) Mixed design Mice Experimenters (4 F and 4 M) Experimenter sex Facial grimacing as a pain behavior Male experimenters induced less pain behaviors and more pain inhibition in rodents.
Vigil et al. (62) Mixed design 132 (132) Menstrual Pain patients Clinicians (12 M and 7 F) Clinician sex Pain tolerance Male clinicians induced higher pain tolerance in female patients.
Modić Stanke and Ivanec (27) Mixed design 96 (69) Healthy participants Experimenters Status (either a professor or a student) Pain threshold Professors generated higher pain thresholds in participants.
Status influenced males more.
Howe et al. (44) Between subjects 160 (80) Healthy Participants Experimenters Status (high or low competence) Placebo and nocebo effects (positive and negative expectations) Competent experimenters enhanced the effects of positive expectations about a placebo cream on allergic responses.

Just for studies in which the effects of experimenter’s/clinician’s sex were investigated, the number of providers is presented; however, some studies have not reported this number. F, females; M, Males; T, transgendered; IBS, irritable bowel syndrome.