Danger expectancies, self-efficacy and insight in spider phobia
Introduction
It is commonly accepted that phobic sufferers are able to accurately assess the level of danger posed by the feared object, activity or situation when detached from it. The client's recognition of the irrationality of their own distress remains a diagnostic criteria for specific phobias in the current edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) (APA, 1994). This classificatory manual clearly states that phobic adults and adolescents “recognize that the phobia is excessive or unreasonable” (APA, 1994, p. 406).
In a modification of this position, Beck and Emery (1985) argued that the sufferer can recognise the excessiveness of their fear only when distant from a phobic interaction. As such Beck and Emery redefined phobia as “a fear of an object or a situation that by social consensus and the person's own appraisal when detached from the situation is disproportionate to the probability of harm inherent in that situation” (Beck and Emery, 1985, p. 116, italics added). In addition, like many other cognitive theorists, they argued that it is not the object itself that causes phobic anxiety, rather the expectations of certain aversive consequences that may result from being in contact with the object. Thus, they contend that danger expectations mediate phobic fear and avoidance.
Recent empirical findings have raised serious questions about the ability of phobic sufferers to rationally evaluate the danger inherent in a phobic encounter, even when detached from it. Menzies, Harris and Jones (1998) examined the level of insight in individuals with specific fear reactions to spiders, heights and enclosed places. For each fearful group they identified a sub-group of fearfuls who showed poor insight into the actual likelihood of danger when removed from the feared stimuli. Thorpe and Salkovskis (1995) investigated the beliefs concerning physical harm in a group of mixed phobics and a group of spider phobics when detached from the phobic stimulus or situation. While half of the group of spider phobics were more than 40% convinced that they would suffer harm after an encounter with the phobic stimulus, none of the controls expressed this level of belief in harmful outcomes. Similarly, Arntz, Lavy, van den Berg and van Rijsoort (1993) found spider phobics to hold strong, negative catastrophic ideas about spiders. These included beliefs which relate to danger (e.g. spiders bite, spiders are poisonous, spiders can aim at people). Importantly, danger-related beliefs were shown to attenuate following one-session of therapist-assisted exposure. Finally, Di Nardo, Guzy, Jenkins, Bak, Tomasi & Copland (1988), administered a structured interview to 16 dog-fearful and 21 non-dog-fearful college students concerning frightening and painful experiences with dogs and expectations about the consequences of contact with dogs. Despite having had fewer traumatic encounters with dogs (56% of the fearful group had had frightening and painful experiences with dogs compared to 66% of the non-fearful group), the fearful group had greater expectancies of harm. While only 10% of the non-fearful subjects believed that physical harm was a likely consequence of an encounter with a dog, all fearful subjects maintained this view.
Several other reports have examined how phobic danger estimates change before, during and after phobic encounters. Menzies and Clarke (1995) obtained danger ratings on the ground and during a height avoidance test on a triple extension ladder with a large sample of solicited acrophobics and age-matched controls. Subjects were not aware that they would soon be asked to climb the ladder when making their pre-task ratings. It was found that even when detached from the phobic situation on the ground, acrophobic patients: (1) gave significantly higher estimates of the probability of falling from a ladder than did controls; (2) gave significantly higher estimates of the injuries that would result from falling and (3) believed their high levels of anticipated anxiety were more reasonable and appropriate to the demands of the situation than controls did. Similarly, Jones, Whitmont and Menzies (1996) found that when detached from the phobic stimulus, spider-fearful subjects; (1) gave significantly higher estimates of the probability of being bitten than controls did; (2) gave significantly higher estimates of the injuries that would result from being bitten and (3) held significantly stronger beliefs that their high levels of anticipated anxiety were more reasonable and appropriate to the demands of the situation than controls. Like Menzies and Clarke, 1995, Jones et al., 1996 also obtained significant relationships between danger estimates and task anxiety during the Behavioural Avoidance Task.
While both of these studies provide evidence for a potential role of danger expectancies in the mediation of phobic phenomenon, the causative nature of the relationship between danger beliefs and subsequent anxiety is questioned by the results in an earlier report of Williams and Watson (1985). These researchers found that when self-efficacy ratings were held constant in partial correlation analyses, the relationships between danger expectancies and anxiety disappeared. Hence, they concluded that self-efficacy is a more likely cognitive mediator of phobic anxiety than danger beliefs. The study conducted by Jones et al. (1996), like that of Menzies and Clarke (1995), did not assess self-efficacy ratings. It is therefore possible that the obtained relationships between danger estimates and anxiety in these reports were simply due to an underlying relationship between danger beliefs and self-efficacy (see further, Menzies & Clarke, 1995).
The present study sought to examine the relationships between danger expectancies, self-efficacy and phobic anxiety and avoidance in spider phobia. In relation to the detached baseline ratings, it is hypothesised that phobic group ratings of danger will be higher than those of controls. In relation to changes in ratings from baseline to a Spider Avoidance Task, it is hypothesised that phobic group ratings of danger will increase whereas the ratings of controls will not. In relation to the cognitive mediation of phobic phenomenon, it is hypothesised that both danger and self-efficacy ratings will be significantly correlated with subjective anxiety and avoidance. Finally, in line with outcome expectancy models of anxiety (rather than self-efficacy accounts), it is hypothesised that danger will remain a predictor of phobic behaviour with self-efficacy ratings held constant, whereas self-efficacy would not be significantly related to phobic phenomenon with danger expectancies held constant.
Section snippets
Phobic group
The sample comprised 15 subjects (13 female) with a mean age of 18.8 years. Subjects were recruited from introductory psychology students at The University of Sydney. Students completed the FSS-III (Wolpe & Lang, 1969) during a lecture. Five hundred and sixteen students (480 female) participated in this initial screening session. Forty-six students indicated the highest level of fear and distress (i.e. ‘very much’) on the 4-point scale for the item ‘harmless spiders’. Appointments with these
Probability of being bitten
Fig. 1 presents the mean score for each group on this variable at each occasion of measurement. As can be seen, phobic ratings of the probability of being bitten, averaged across the three testing phases, were significantly higher than control subject ratings (F(1, 28)=11.678, p<0.002). SAT ratings of the probability of being bitten, averaged across the two groups, were higher than baseline (pre-SAT and post-SAT) ratings (F(1, 28)=23.850, p<0.001). A significant interaction between groups and
Discussion
Support for the first hypothesis was found in the present experiment. When detached from the phobic stimulus, phobic subjects: (1) gave higher estimates of the probability of being bitten than controls did; (2) gave higher estimates of the injuries that would result from being bitten and (3) in line with these first two findings, believed their high levels of anticipated anxiety were more reasonable and appropriate to the demands of the situation than controls did. Once again these results
References (17)
- et al.
Negative beliefs of spider phobics: a psychometric evaluation of the spider phobia beliefs questionnaire
Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy
(1993) - et al.
Etiology and maintenance of dog fears
Behaviour Research and Therapy
(1988) - et al.
Psychometric description of some specific-fear questionnaires
Behavior Therapy
(1974) - et al.
Danger expectancies and insight in acrophobia
Behaviour Research and Therapy
(1995) - et al.
Phobic beliefs: do cognitive factors play a role in specific phobias?
Behaviour Research and Therapy
(1995) - et al.
Perceived danger and perceived self-efficacy as cognitive determinants of acrophobic behavior
Behavior Therapy
(1985) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders
(1994)- et al.
Relative efficacy of desensitization and modelling approaches for inducing behavioral, affective and attitudinal changes
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
(1969)
Cited by (39)
Death anxiety and mental health: Requiem for a dreamer
2023, Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental PsychiatryCitation Excerpt :Thus, theoretically, avoiding these phobic objects may be one potential way of preventing death. Moderate to large correlations have been found between death-relevant measures and blood-injury phobia (de Jong & Merckelbach, 1998), spider phobia (Jones & Menzies, 2000), height phobia (Menzies & Clarke, 1995) and claustrophobia (Menzies, Sharpe, & Dar-Nimrod, 2019). Unfortunately, only one study has used an experimental design.
Specific phobia
2023, Encyclopedia of Mental Health, Third Edition: Volume 1-3The Medium is the Message: Effects of Mediums of Communication on Perceptions and Emotions in Social Anxiety Disorder
2021, Journal of Anxiety DisordersCitation Excerpt :Why would visual mediums lead to positive emotions? First, if voice/text mediums operate as safety behaviors, then dropping them could create an exposure which when completed can result in the experience of positive emotions (Jones & Menzies, 2000). In addition, safety behaviors have been associated with a self-protective approach (aimed to protect the self from rejection), and such an approach hinders the development of positive emotions (Alden & Taylor, 2010).
Specific phobia
2019, Pediatric Anxiety DisordersPathways to change in one-session exposure with and without cognitive intervention: An exploratory study in spider phobia
2011, Journal of Anxiety DisordersCitation Excerpt :Spider phobics strongly hold the belief that spiders are dangerous (Arntz, Lavy, van den Berg, & Rijsoort, 1993). Furthermore, research has indicated that these beliefs entail a high truth-value, in the sense that they are not readily recognized as irrational or excessive (Jones & Menzies, 2000). These cognitions can also present themselves at an indirect, less accessible level of processing (Teachman, Gregg, & Woody, 2001; Teachman & Woody, 2003).