Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Studies - Coggle Diagram

- - - - Pps were recruited for the study using a media campaign, which informed them of the opportunity to take part in a free of charge intervention programme aimed at treating the fear of flying.
        In total, 41 pps came forward and 20 of these (8 males and 12 females) were randomly assigned to the treatment group (the group that would be subject to systematic desensitisation therapy). The remaining 21 (9 males and 12 females) were assigned to a control group (waiting for systematic desensitisation therapy). Various diagnostic information tool on the fear of flying of flying, in particular the IDG-FV (a spanish general diagnostic information tool on the fear of flying). Three key questions in the IDG-FV were allowed measurement before and after treatment.
        Other measures for assessing the dependent variables pre and post treatment included three other fear of flying scales (EMV scales):
        
        Fear displayed during the flight
        
        Fear of flight preliminary to the actual flight, for example going to the airport, obtaining boarding card, etc
        
        Fear without involvement - this contains four elements not direcly related to flying, for exmaple seeing a plane.
        There were also 2 EPAV scales (Scales of Expectation of Danger and Anxiety) that measured the occurrence of catastrophic thoughts, such as the fear of the engine catching fire, or wing falling off and additional measures of subjective physiological anxiety.
        The researchers additionally recorded the pps actual physiological arousal using measures of heart rate, palm temperature and muscular tension.
        All pps were interviewed individually and completed the IDG-FV. They later came back to watch a video of a plane trip (showing a person from the time she packed her case to her arriving by plane at her destination). Just before watching the video there was a habituation session involving a period of time during which the ppt could become acquainted with the situation. It was here that the pps heart rate, temperature and muscular tension were measured for a period of 3 minutes prior to the showing of the video. The pps were asked to 'feel as involved as possible' in the video.
        At the end of the video of the video, an interview appointment was made of presenting the treatment to be followed (in the case of the treatment group), or for the next assessment session (in the control group subjects). In both cases the interval between the pre and post test sessions was approximately 8 weeks. For the treatment group this involved 2 one-hour sessions a week with between 12 and 15 sessioin in total. The session used tradition training techniques of breathing progressive muscle relaxation and imagination. The treatment combined in vitro (imagined situations) and in vivo elements (exposure to real-life situations). It systematically used the technique of stop thinking and of brief relaxation in natural situation where the phobic stimulus was present. After 8 weeks, the treatment and control group were invited back to retake the questionnaires and simulated video test.
    - - They took three different measures taken before and after systematic desensitisation (or no therapy) in the treatment and control groups. Before any treatment began, the scores between both groups were fairly similar, suggesting that there was little differences between them and that they were a fairly homogeneous sample.
        For the control group the 'mere passing of time' without any form of treatment did not lead to any reduction in the pps assessment of their own fear of flying or objective measures of arousal. Yet for the treatment group(with the exception of 2 pps) there were significant arousal reduction in the pps self-reporting of their levels of fear as well as in objective physiological measures.
        Of the scores they obtained using the scales and objective physiological measures, they found that there was a significant reduction in fear measure following systematic desensitisation; many of these changes were highly significant. In fact only 10% of those treated with systematic desensitisation showed no significant reduction in fear measures.
    - - Capafons et al aimed to validate the effectiveness of systematic desensitisation as a treatment for the fear of flying, and to assess the therapeutic success of systematic desensitisation when applied to this type of specific phobia.
    - - Capafons et al concluded that given the lack of improvement in the control group and the significant improvement of the experimental group, systematic desensitisation is an effective treatment for decreasing or eradicating fear of flying. He noted however, that systematic desensitisation is not infallible given that 10% of pps were incorrectly classified. This suggests that future research should look at why the therapy was successful ad why it was more or less successful in certain patients.