Contempory study: Capafon et al (1998) Flashcards
Aim
Assess the effectiveness of SD in reducing fear of flying
Procedure:
What group design was used
Independant group design
Procedure:
What was the difference between the experimental group and the control group
control group - tested at 2 different points in time for fear of flying (no treatment)
experimental group - tested fear of flying before and after treatment
Procedure:
What was the IV
treatment or no treatment
Procedure:
What was the DV
Levels of fear of flying
Procedure:
How was ‘fear of flying’ measured
Using the Fear of Flying Scale
- also measuring muscle tension and heart rate in response to video tape of flying
Procedure:
How were partcipants paired?
… by sex, age and anxiety levels.
Procedure:
Means age for each group
Control - 34.05
Experimental - 29.65
Procedure:
How many sessions did the experimental group have
12-15 one hour sessions (twice per week)
Findings:
FIndings in control group
No significant difference in anxiety levels from the first and second test
Findings:
findings in experimental group
90% reduction of symptoms
significant reduction in physiological measures except body temperature
Conclusion
‘Results indicate that SD is a highly effective treatment for fear of flying, with a success rate of 90%)
Strength of the controls
It uses a variety of valid and reliable measures of anxiety
Strength of the controls:
Evidence of reliable and valid measures of anxiety
Fear of Flying Scale had better than +.85 test-retest scores as shown in sosa et al.
Strength of the controls:
what does this mean for the results
Valid anxiety measures makes us as sure as possible that true anxiety levels were shown
Weakness of the study:
Anxiety levels after the study were measured shortly after
Weakness of the study:
Why is measuring shortly after treatment a weakness
The long term implications of the study are unknown, so we don’t kno whow long the effects of the treatment lasted
Weakness of the study:
What does this mean for results
results may give us false impressions on the effectiveness of systematic desensitisation on fear of flying
Weakness of the study:
what is a competing arguement towards this weakness
Other studies after this one have shown the effectiveness in the long term for fear of flying
Weakness of the study:
example of a study that supports the competing arguement
Botella et al found treatment effects maintained even a year after treatment
Weakness of ecological validity:
Lacks ecological validity because participants never actually experiences being on a plane
Weakness of ecological validity:
Evidence of them not being in a natural environment
They watched videos of flying and experienced simulations of being in an airport
Weakness of ecological validity:
What does this mean for the results
May not reflect reflect true display of anxiety towards flying so SD may not have worked to the best way possible.
