The etiology of specific phobias: A review

Abstract

ABSTRACT. The present article summarizes themy and data about symptomutology, epid.emio&y, and etiology of specijii phobias. Additionally, the cognitive mechanisms involved in specific phobias are briefly discussed. By and Icrrg, the general pattern behind tk development of specific phobias can be summarized as follows. Specijk fears are highly preualent among young children. In most children, these fears r@esent transitory phenomma. Howevq in a small sub grvup of children, speczfu: fears become chronic due to classical conditioning, modelling, and/or negative infMmation transmission. Once a specjk phobia bus okveluped, it may be maintained by cognitive biases (i.e., attentional bias, covariation bias, and reasoning bias). Though specif ic phobias form a heterogeneous class of disomks, this pattern appears to be a good approximation. Neverth.ebzss, several questions remain. For example, there is no ready explanation for the fact that specijc phobias are mo7e often diagnosed in women than in mm. Similarly, it is not clear to what extent the nonrandom distribution of phobias can be interp-ted in terms of cultural factors. Resolving these issues is not only important in its own right, but may have considerable kristic value fm our unokrstanding of other anxiety disorti.SPECIFIC (formerly "simple," "monosymptomatic," or "focal") phobias are irrational and persistent fears of certain objects or animals. Whereas the concept of "specific phobia" is relatively recent, the condition to which it refers is not (Errera, 1962). For example, Hippocrates described a man displaying an irrational fear of bridges. Likewise, detailed discussions of phobic symptoms can be found in the work of 17th and 18th century authors such as Descartes, Le Camus, and Sauvages. Although descriptions of phobic behavior have remained remarkably consistent throughout history, theories purporting to explain this behavior have changed dramatically. In early medical texts, speculations about eye muscle dysfunction, vascular abnormalities, or mysterious underground water streams were not uncommon (Errera, 1962). During the past decades, our understanding of the origins of specific phobias Correspondence should be addressed to Harald Merckelbach,

Reductions in Children’s Vicariously Learnt Avoidance and Heart Rate Responses Using Positive Modeling

“…The current dot-probe evidence, along with evidence from a visual search task with similar-age children (Reynolds et al, 2014), suggests that vicarious learning experiences can contribute to the development of attentional bias for threatening stimuli in children. Clinically, this finding is important because attentional biases not only play a likely causal role in anxiety disorders (see Mathews & MacLeod, 2002), but also may maintain anxiety by causing stimulus avoidance and preventing the extinction of fear beliefs (Field, 2006a;Merckelbach et al, 1996).…”

“…Research also indicates that both anxious and nonanxious individuals show increased attention for threatening stimuli (Cisler & Koster, 2010;Field, Hadwin, & Lester, 2011;Garner, 2010;MacLeod, Mathews, & Tata, 1986;Merckelbach et al, 1996;see Mogg & Bradley, 1998). Reynolds et al (2014) found children showed attentional bias for animals following vicarious fear learning, and this effect was moderated by increases in their fear beliefs.…”

Can prepared fear conditioning result from verbal instructions?

“…Fearful reactions can also be established by providing participants with verbal information about the contingency between the CS and US, in the absence of any actual CS-US pairings (Field, 2006;Rachman, 1977). Previous research has demonstrated that verbal instructions can be a very powerful tool for inducing fear reactions (e.g., Cameron, Roche, Schlund, & Dymond, 2016;King, Eleonora, & Ollendick, 1998;Merckelbach, de Jong, Muris, & van den Hout, 1996;Muris & Field, 2010). Despite its potency, however, fear conditioning through verbal instructions is still poorly understood (e.g., Olsson & Phelps, 2007).…”

The behavioral inhibition system and the verbal information pathway to children's fears.

“…In terms of expectancy evaluations, Davey (1997) noted a body of conditioning research suggesting that the core CS-US association driving acquired fear responses in humans is influenced by existing beliefs about the likely outcome of interacting with the CS. For example, a child believing that a dog will bite her who is subsequently bitten will have a stronger dogtrauma association than a child for whom the bite conflicts with their prior assumptions (see Field, in press).Although retrospective studies have shown that threat information contributes to the development of fears, these reports will be prone to memory bias and forgetting of potentially important learning episodes (see King, Gullone & Ollendick, 1998;Merckelbach, De Jong, Muris & Van den Hout, 1996 for reviews). Field, Argyris & Knowles (2001) have developed an experimental paradigm for looking at the effects of fear information in the development of animal fear beliefs in children.…”

“…Retrospective studies have shown support for all three pathways (see King, Gullone & Ollendick, 1998;Merckelbach, De Jong, Muris & van den Hout, 1996 for reviews), however, the information pathway remains the least experimentally studied. Although…”