contemp (capafons et al 1998)

Question 1

aim (intro)

Answer 1

To evaluate the effectiveness of systematic desensitisation as a treatment for fear of flying

Question 2

sample

Answer 2

41 in total (17 male, 24 female) volunteers obtained Bia a media campaign asking for people to undergo a treatment programme for fear of flying.
Allocated into either the treatment group (those receiving the treatment) or the control group (those waiting for treatment).

Question 3

Procedure

Answer 3

diagnostic scales applied to ppts to assess level of fear and establish a baseline.
All ppts shown a preparing for a flight video and sat 1.8m from the screen, being asked to engage as much as possible.
stress levels recorded again.
both in vivo and in vitro treatment uses.
After 8 weeks ppts asked to complete a questionnaire on fear and response to a simulated video where measures like heart rate were recorded, using objective measures like heart rate and muscle tension and also using self reports of fear and catastrophic thoughts.

Question 4

findings

Answer 4

Before treatment, scores between the treatment and control groups were similar after systematic desensitisation measures of stress were reduces according to both types of data, with the exception of 2 ppts.
with the exception of 10% of ppts in the treatment group, a significant difference was found. concluding systematic desensitisation is an effective treatment for fear of flying for the majority of people. success rate of 90%.

Question 5

generalisability

Answer 5

weakness- Volunteer samples would consist of people willing to do the trial as they volunteered themselves. this means that the sample may not include those with extreme phobias as they would not have volunteered therefore decreasing generalisability as does not represent people with extreme phobias of flying.

Question 5

reliability

Answer 5

strength- Procedure involves watching a simulation and measuring heart rate which is a standardised procedure allowing replication so other scientists can gather their own results to compare, therefore increasing reliability.

Question 6

internal validity

Answer 6

strength- A baseline established to compare results.
controlled lab study with extraneous variables controlled as both in vivo and in vitro used.
weakness- ppts being asked to fully engage could lead to ppt variables.

Question 7

ethics

Answer 7

unethical to not give treatment to the control group and deceive them as you are wasting their time.
ppts deceived as they did not know this was an experiment.

Question 8

Application