.. obia. The material for this analysis was collected during the course of the clinical experiment in which a comparison was made between three methods for reducing fear: cognitive intervention, repeated exposure, and interceptive retraining.(Shafran, 75) Repeated exposure to a claustrophobic situation was followed by a steep reduction in fear and comparable reduction was observed after cognitive intervention without exposure. The negative cognitions thought to be liable for or at least involved in claustrophobia can be virtually removed by direct modification (cognitive intervention) or by indirect modification (exposure). The declines were as large as with the theory of cognitive therapy.
The absence was of any difference in cognitive changes seemingly produced by the two different methods raises again the uncomfortable possibility that the cognitive changes observed after successful fear reduction may be the consequences rather than the cause of change, or possibly that the cognitive changes are more correlates of fear. (Rachman, 75) When dealing with fear many questions need to be examined. Are negative cognitions associated with fear? Are negative cognitions associated with the return of fear? The results of the pattern imply that the number of the believability of cognitions are related to the successful reduction of fear. The results also imply that a close relationship between a number and the believability of cognitions return of fear. There was however, an absence or pre-determined association between cognitions and fear. (Shafran 83) The reduction of fear was related to a reduction of body sensations.
The return of fear was also related to a return on body sensations. The return of fear was not consistently affected by speed of fear reduction and could not be predicted by initial levels of heart rate recordings. Return fear was associated with the under- prediction. (Shafran 83) The post-test zero was never described in the presence of believable cognitions and body sensations. Shafrans reporting an absence of cognitions post-test did not describe high fear levels with the exception of three individuals who reported moderate fear. High fear or panic was never described in the absence of believable cognitions and body sensations.(Shafran 83) Exploitation of individual cognitions and body sensations revealed that removal of the control cognition concerning “trapped”, “suffocation”, or “control” , was related with an absence of believable cognitions and fear reduction.
Specifically, the removal of the cognitions “trapped” and “suffocation” at post-test was related with the absence of all other believable cognitions and a seventy-two point decrease in fear.(Shafran 83) The question of the association between fear reduction and cognitions was examined in different ways; all the answers were in fact consistent with a key cognition complex in claustrophobia involving feelings of being trapped, suffocation, and loss of control. (Shafran 83) Claustrophobia 8 Virtual Reality Treatment of Claustrophobia This research deals with the effectiveness of the treatment for claustrophobia by using Virtual Reality. The patient for this test is a forty-three year old woman who suffers from clinical significant distress and impairment. She had been referred by Mental Health Services because she was unable to undergo a CTS to detect whether or not she had a lesion on her spinal column. The woman had been afraid of enclosed spaces (i.e.
elevators, airplanes) for many years, dating back to when she was a child. The measures the doctors used to administer the test were based of six different scales. The first was called Fear and Avoidance Scale (FAS); it was based on a zero to ten scale. Zero being “no fear” or “I never avoid it” all the way up to ten being “Extreme fear” or ” I always avoid it”. The next was the Fear of Close Space Measures (FCSM); this is the scale for the degree of fear in closed spaces. This is ranged from zero to ten, zero being “no fear”, ten being “extreme fear”.
There were three more tests that had to do with the zero to ten, they were Problem-related impairment questions (PRIQ), and Subjective units of discomfort scale (SUDS) and the attitude towards CTS measure (TAM). Lastly were the Self-efficacy tests towards the target behavior measure (SETBM), which assessed the degree of self- efficacy similar to the target problem CTS. The eight sessions were carried out; the patient was placed in three environments based of their degrees of difficulty. The first environment was called Setting 0: It consisted of a balcony or a small garden, measured at 2 x 5 m. The second environment Claustrophobia 9 was called Room 1: a 4 x 5 m room that had door and a big window that could be opened and closed. Finally, the last environment Room 2: a 3 x 3 m, which had no furniture or windows.
The ceiling and floors were much darker and had a wooden texture to give the idea that the room is even more enclosed. The patient at all times had the option to lock the door is she felt it necessary. The results of the test were very significant and can be seen in the charts on the corresponding page. The woman at first did have some difficulty when she was tested with all the measures pre- virtual reality; she scored a 10 on the FAS, a 2 on the PRIQ, and a 4 on the SETBM. An 8 was also scored on the FCSM. During post treatment, the numbers dramatically decreased, most of the scores were in the lower range, which showed that the treatment had worked. Plus during the follow-up she still continued to show signs of improvement.
Looking at Table 2, in the rooms, there you could see that the SUDS were much higher when the patient was exposed to a more threatening environment (For example, Room2: During sessions 4 and 5). Subsequently as each session passed, it decreased less and less. She found that the treatment was very successful and rated it an eight out of a possible ten. Most importantly she was able to have the CTS done without any difficulty. With more research like this, hopefully there can be a somewhat safe and effective way to help people over come this debilitating and complex anxiety disorder. Claustrophobia 10 In conclusion, this paper has shown that claustrophobia does cause people to avoid confined areas.
Each individual in these cases had their lives affected by this fear and with the proper treatment will be able to overcome it. With more cognitive and behavioral research, and those afflicted with this fear, claustrophobia can someday be a thing of the past. No longer will thousands have to suffer with this phobia, and maybe then they can go on with their lives and see the world in a whole different aspect, one with no anxiety and most of all no fear. Bibliography Booth, Richard; Rachman, S. (1992).
The reduction of claustrophobia. Behavior Research & Therapy, 30(3), 207-221 Botella, C, Banos; R.M. Perpina; C. Villa; H. Alcaniz; M. Rey; A.
(1998) Virtual Reality treatment of claustrophobia. Behavior Research & Therapy, 36(2) 239-246. Harris, Lynn M; Robinson; John Menzies; Ross G. (1999) Evidence for fear of Suffocation as components of claustrophobia. Behavior Research & Therapy, 37(2), 155-159 Shafran, R; Booth, R; Rachman, S. (1993).
The reduction of claustrophobia. Behavior Research& Therapy 31(5), 75-85.