Search

Few studies among the Chinese population concerning avoidance out of fear have been reported. Existing studies are limited to school and collegiate samples while overlooking ethnic minorities, of which China has more than 50. In this study, a general population sample in China indicated the level at which they would avoid certain situations. The data were analyzed relative to age, ethnicity, sex, and the amount of time living in urban or rural areas. Three samples (urban Han, n=144; rural Han, n=144; Urban Hui, n=72) were selected using stratified quota sampling. Respondents identified that they avoided social situations the most and agoraphobic situations the least. Overall, women expressed significantly greater fear. This sex difference was less marked in the urban sample where the Chinese tradition of male dominance has been diluted due to urbanization and modernization. There were few age-related differences, although some fears among the elderly were explained by age-related vulnerabilities and folklore. The Hui minority group had significantly lower overall scores than the Han group; this was attributed to the role of their Islamic beliefs.

This study tests two alternative hypotheses about how phobic information is processed in spider fearful and nonfearful individuals: (1) the threat-related cognitive set hypothesis and (2) the dimensions hypothesis. Counter to the traditional cognitive model of fear, the dimensions hypothesis predicts that spider fearful individuals tend to prioritise the harm-safety dimension when evaluating animal stimuli, and the consequent stretching of that evaluative dimension will confer advantage to the accessing of harm information when confronted with phobic stimuli, but conversely safety information when encountering FI stimuli. Spider fearful and nonfearful participants generated lists of reasons why spiders, fear relevant (e.g. tigers, snakes) and fear irrelevant (e.g. rabbits, kittens) animals might be harmful and might be safe. The findings indicate that, in comparison to a nonfearful group, spider fearful participants have facilitated access to both harm and safety information which is context dependent: spider fearful participants were able to generate more reasons why spiders may be harmful and fewer why they might be safe than nonfearful participants, but conversely were able to generate more reasons why fear irrelevant animals might by safe and fewer reasons why they might be harmful than the nonfearful group. The implications of these findings for our understanding of the cognitive mechanisms underlying fears and phobias are discussed.

This study uses a multidimensional scaling approach to investigate the hypothesis that spider fearful individuals give priority to a threat-safety dimension when making judgments. The results show that when making judgments about stimuli, spider fearful individuals (1) placed significantly greater comparative weighting on a threat-relevant dimension than on a non-emotive dimension (colour), and (2) tended to rate threatening pairs of stimuli and safe pairs of stimuli as more similar than did the nonfearful group. This prioritised dimensional processing suggests a mechanism by which phobics can exhibit what initially appear to be paradoxical tendencies to give priority to both threat and safety information.

This paper reports the results of two studies investigating judgements made by spider phobics about the potential threatening consequences (unconditioned stimulus, UCS, expectancies) associated with their phobic stimulus, fear-relevant (FR) stimuli, and fear-irrelevant (FI) stimuli. Using a 'thought experiment' UCS expectancy paradigm, the studies reported found that (1) spider phobics reported significantly higher UCS expectancies to spider stimuli than nonphobics, (2) spider phobics consistently underestimated the probability of aversive consequences following FI stimuli and (3) this underestimation of UCS expectancies to FI stimuli in phobics was not the result of a contrast effect resulting from sequential FR and FI judgements. This differential effect may have important implications for the kind of mechanism which mediates judgements about phobic consequences. These findings suggest that the dimensions on which phobic stimuli are categorised may be 'stretched' in the case of phobics and that this gives rise to the comparative underestimation of threat associated with FI stimuli but also makes phobics more vulnerable to acquiring other phobias.

The present study represents a cross-cultural study of animal fears in which subjects from seven Western and Asian countries were asked to rate their fear of a range of familiar animals. Factor analyses of these ratings in all samples revealed a coherent three factor solution in which animals fell into a fear-irrelevant, fear-relevant (fierce) or disgust-relevant category. The core group of animals making up the disgust-relevant category were similar across cultures. Some views on how a universal disgust-relevant category of feared animals may have developed are discussed.

Using a covariation assessment procedure, the present study pre-experimentally manipulated subjects' assessments of the dangerousness of fear-relevant stimuli. The results demonstrated that this manipulation subsequently influenced both a priori expectancy that the stimulus will be followed by an aversive consequence (UCS), and inflated an a posteriori covariation bias indicating that subjects judged the stimulus to be followed more frequently by the aversive UCS than by a non-aversive stimulus. These findings support the view that judgments about such characteristics as the dangerousness of a stimulus causally contribute to a UCS expectancy bias and an a posteriori covariation bias, and thus contribute to the formation of selective associations.

This paper describes three experiments examining predictions from the expectancy bias model of selective associations (Davey, 1995). In a simulated 'threat' conditioning procedure, Experiment 1 showed that UCS expectancy following both ontogenetic and phylogenetic CSs was significantly predicted by: (1) ratings of the dangerousness of the CS, perceptions of CS-UCS similarity, and level of prior fear to the CS; and (2) ratings of CS-UCS similarity on the dimensions of valence, arousal and anxiety. Experiment 2 used a covariation assessment procedure which confirmed the findings of Experiment 1, and also showed that both phylogenetic and ontogenetic fear-relevant CSs exhibited both a priori and a posteriori covariation biases. Experiment 3 found that Ss high and low in fear to a fear-relevant CS exhibited a significant a priori UCS expectancy bias, but this bias was significantly larger in high fear Ss. Only high fear Ss exhibited an a posteriori covariation bias. These results are consistent with predictions from the expectancy bias model.

Two studies are described which assessed the extent to which fears and phobias are associated with particular types of strategies for coping with stress. Study 1 compared scores on the Fear Survey Schedule (FSS) with scores on a modified version of the Health and Daily Living Form and the Miller Behavioural Style Scale (MBSS) in a normal population. A principal component analysis revealed that high scores on the social fears and miscellaneous phobias subscales of the FSS were directly associated with avoidance coping strategies, inversely associated with cognitive reappraisal strategies which devalue or deny the importance of the stressor, but unrelated to any of the measures on the MBSS. Study 2 compared the coping strategies of simple phobics, panic disorder patients and normal controls. Both simple phobics and panic disorder patients differed from normal control subjects by reporting greater use of avoidance coping strategies, and reduced use of cognitive threat devaluation. These findings are consistent with models of anxiety-based disorders which implicate avoidance or escape in the maintenance of such disorders, or which identify the evaluation of the precipitating trauma as important in the acquisition of such disorders.

This study investigated the effect of levels of prior fear to a fear-relevant stimulus on UCS expectancy ratings in a threat conditioning procedure. The results suggested that UCS-expectancy ratings are independently influenced by both the nature of the stimulus (whether it is fear-relevant or fear-irrelevant) and the level of prior fear to the stimulus. Furthermore, significantly higher UCS-expectancy levels caused by prior fear and stimulus type were accompanied in some stages of the experiment by greater magnitudes of skin conductance responses during the stimulus.

In 2 experiments, the effect of anxiety on the cued-unconditioned stimulus (UCS) rehearsal phenomenon was investigated (T. Jones & G. C. L. Davey, 1990). In Experiment 1, postconditioning rehearsal of the unconditioned stimulus (UCS) resulted in an increase in conditioned response (CR) strength during extinction, but only in subjects with high levels of trait anxiety. An induced mood procedure was used in Experiment 2, and a postrehearsal increase in CR strength was found in subjects who had undergone induced somatic anxiety but not in subjects who had undergone induced worrying or who underwent a neutral induction procedure. In both experiments, the increase in CR strength following UCS rehearsal was associated with inflated ratings of the aversiveness of rehearsing the UCS. These results are discussed in terms of the ways in which anxiety might influence UCS rehearsal and facilitate physiological CRs to the conditioned stimulus.

This paper reports the results of two studies investigating a disease-avoidance model of common animal fears. In Study 1, a factor analysis of a variety of self-rated animal fears revealed that these fears can be grouped into two theoretically meaningful categories which correspond to predatory animals and fear-relevant animals. Study 2 found a significant correlation between disgust sensitivity and fear to animals in the fear-relevant category, but not between disgust sensitivity and fear to animals in the predatory category. In addition, fear of animals in the fear-relevant category was significantly associated with scores on the obsessive washing sub-scale of the Maudsley Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory, but was not associated with obsessive behaviour in general.

This study examined the relationship between disgust/contamination sensitivity and fear of animals. The results suggested that sensitivity to disgust and contamination was directly related to scores on the animal phobia and fear of illness and death sub-scales of the Fear Survey Schedule (FSS). Further analysis suggested that disgust/contamination sensitivity was related only to fear of certain groups of animals: namely those animals that are not considered to attack and harm human beings but are considered fear-evoking (e.g. rat, spider, cockroach), and those animals that are normally considered to evoke revulsion (e.g. maggot, snail, slug). Disgust/contamination sensitivity was not related to fear of animals that are considered highly likely to attack and harm human beings (e.g. tiger, lion, shark). These results are discussed as support for a disease-avoidance model of common animal fears.

This study describes a human electrodermal conditioning experiment in which subjects were given false skin conductance feedback during CS presentation. In comparison with appropriate attentional control groups, subjects who believed they were exhibiting a strong CR did actually emit a greater magnitude CR, while subjects who believed they were exhibiting only a weak CR emitted a significantly lower magnitude CR. When both self-report and behavioural measures of UCS revaluation were taken after conditioning, the evidence suggested that response feedback had not differentially affected subjects evaluation of the aversiveness of the UCS. The results suggest that the response modulating effects of response feedback observed in this and other studies are not caused by response feedback influencing evaluation of the UCS, but they are consistent with the hypothesis that beliefs about the nature of response feedback influence the strength of the UCS representation itself.

This study describes a human electrodermal conditioning experiment in which subjects were asked to mentally rehearse the UCS in a period following initial fear conditioning and prior to a test period involving nonreinforced presentations of the CS. Subjects who were asked to rehearse the UCS retained a differential fear CR during subsequent unreinforced presentations of the CS, but control subjects who were asked to rehearse either a nonaversive event or an aversive event unrelated to the UCS failed to retain the differential CR they had acquired during conditioning. These results suggest that rehearsal of the UCS during periods when CS and UCS are absent can aid the persistence of a fear CR in the absence of further pairings of the CS and UCS. It is argued that these effects can be explained in terms of the effect of UCS rehearsal on the strength and evaluation of the UCS representation. It is also suggested that cued UCS rehearsal might provide a useful procedure for understanding clinical incubation effects and for understanding how the 'worry' process contributes to the maintenance and incubation of fear.

Recent developments in the study of Pavlovian conditioning in humans have suggested that the strength of a conditioned response (CR) is affected not only by associative processes that link the conditioned stimulus (CS) with the unconditioned stimulus (UCS), but also by processes which lead the individual to revalue the UCS itself. These latter processes can frequently lead to dramatic changes in CR strength independently of any experience with the CS-UCS contingency. This paper discusses a number of ways in which UCS revaluation can be effected in human subjects, and discusses their implications for conditioning models of acquired fears.

This study describes a human electrodermal conditioning experiment involving processes of sensory preconditioning and UCS inflation. In stage 1 of the experiment Ss received six presentations of a CS+ paired with an innocuous 65 dB tone (UCS) and six presentations of an unpaired CS-. In stage 2, Ss in the experimental group had the aversiveness of the UCS inflated as the intensity of the 65 dB tone was increased to 115 dB. In stage 3, Ss were given test presentations of CS+ and CS-. A differential CR to CS+ was found only in stage 3 of the experiment and only in Ss who had experienced the UCS inflation procedure. These results suggest that (i) sensory preconditioning had occurred in stage 1 despite the failure to observe a differential CR in this stage, and (ii) the differential CR observed in stage 3 was mediated by an internal representation of the UCS whose aversiveness had been inflated in stage 2. As well as confirming that processes of sensory preconditioning and UCS inflation can be observed in human as well as animal Ss, these findings have important implications for contemporary conditioning models of clinical fears. In particular, they suggest that a contemporary conditioning model of acquired fears is not bound by the need to discover contiguous stimulus-trauma experiences in the histories of clinical phobias since, in humans at least, processes of stimulus association and UCS revaluation appear to be relatively independent.

The present study investigated some of the factors which differentiate individuals with dental anxieties and phobias from those without such fears. In particular, two questions were addressed: (i) What differentiates subjects who have never been anxious about dental treatment from subjects who at some time have been anxious? and (ii) What factors lead to subjects changing their attitudes either from anxious to relaxed or from relaxed to anxious? The results suggest that the factors which influence the acquisition and modulation of dental anxieties are consistent with the associative and representational processes portrayed in contemporary models of human conditioning. Subjects who reported never having had anxieties about dental treatment were less likely to have had a painful dental treatment than subjects who did report an anxiety. Subjects who did report a painful dental experience but did not acquire anxiety reported a history of dental treatment favourable to the operation of latent inhibition. Subjects who reported that they were good at enduring pain were more likely to report a longer interval between their very first dental treatment and their first painful dental treatment. Under some conditions in which latent inhibition should have precluded the acquisition of a dental fear, an anxiety appeared to be acquired because a very painful experience had attenuated the latent inhibition process. Subjects whose dental anxiety did not remit reported significantly more painful and traumatic dental experiences than subjects whose anxiety did remit.