Capafon's Study

• what was his aim?

  to asses therapeutic effectiveness of systematic desensitisation as a treatment for the fear of flying
• how many people were involved in the study?

  41
• how many people were randomly assigned the treatment group?

  20
• how many people were assigned the waiting list group?

  21
• what did the treatment group consist of?

  8 males and 12 females
• what did the control group (waiting list group) consist of?

  9 males and 21 females
• how were these participants recruited?

  media advertisement
• what were the 2 groups balanced for?

  gender, age and self reported fear of flying plus psychological measures
• what were the dependent variables of the study?

  • clinical interviews
  • self report scales
  • physiological measures
• what was the procedure?

  the treatment group consisted of two 1 hour sessions per week (12-15 sessions)

  in the sessions they received breathing and progressive relaxation techniques and imagination with vivo exposure
• what were the independent variables?

  the treatments group's scores for 11 variables compared to the control variables so that improvement can be seen
• what were the results?

  • initial measures for each the control and treatment group were similar - showing that prior to the treatments, both groups had the same respect for fear of flying
  • after treatment there were significant differences on all but 2 of the 11 variables - temperature and fear without involvement
  • before and after measures showed that the control group did not get over their fears in just the passing of time
  • 2/20 participants in treatment group did not show significant improvement
• what is the conclusion?

  overall the programme successfully reduced the fear of flying in the treatment group
• what is positive about the generalisability?

  reasonable sample of male and female - no gender bias
• what is negative about the generalisability?

  it was a volunteer sample - may not generalise to all fear of flying as some people are less motivated to get over the fear

  also difficult to generalise to other phobias
• what is positive about the reliability?

  measures physiological arousal (Heart rate, temp) and therefore should be consistent - doesn't matter who measures
• what is the negative about the reliability?

  response to questions in interviews may be effected by interviewer characteristics
• what is positive about the validity?

  variables controlled and the groups were balanced for fear of flying - reduced confounding variables

  physiological measures of anxiety are objective - HR and temperaturee
• what are the negatives of validity?

  possible the demand characteristic - participants exaggerated their phobia for the treatment

  lacks ecological validity - success of treatment was assessed in simulated situation
• what is the application for this study?

  benefits individuals and other families affected by the phobia - family not isolated

  benefits the airline compaines
• what are the ethics of this study?

  • treatment for the control group was deliberately delayed despite the treatment being able to help them
  • but without the control comparison was not possible and therefore - reducing the scientific credibility - important to assess the credibility of the treatment
• what about the protection of paricipants in the study?

  they were put into a stress inducing situation but they volunteered for the treatment and they knew they could withdraw at any time