Understanding animal fears: a comparison of the cognitive vulnerability and harm-looming models

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The Cognitive Vulnerability Model holds that both clinical and sub-clinical manifestations of animal fears are a result of how an animal is perceived, and can be used to explain both individual differences in fear acquisition and the...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Armfield Jason M
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2007-12-01
Series:BMC Psychiatry
Online Access:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-244X/7/68
id doaj-fed23e30b515467fb4765d0b252eef99
record_format Article
spelling doaj-fed23e30b515467fb4765d0b252eef992020-11-24T22:07:15ZengBMCBMC Psychiatry1471-244X2007-12-01716810.1186/1471-244X-7-68Understanding animal fears: a comparison of the cognitive vulnerability and harm-looming modelsArmfield Jason M<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The Cognitive Vulnerability Model holds that both clinical and sub-clinical manifestations of animal fears are a result of how an animal is perceived, and can be used to explain both individual differences in fear acquisition and the uneven distribution of fears in the population. This study looked at the association between fear of a number of animals and perceptions of the animals as uncontrollable, unpredictable, dangerous and disgusting. Also assessed were the perceived loomingness, prior familiarity, and negative evaluation of the animals as well as possible conditioning experiences.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>162 first-year University students rated their fear and perceptions of four high-fear and four low-fear animals.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Perceptions of the animals as dangerous, disgusting and uncontrollable were significantly associated with fear of both high- and low-fear animals while perceptions of unpredictability were significantly associated with fear of high-fear animals. Conditioning experiences were unrelated to fear of any animals. In multiple regression analyses, loomingness did not account for a significant amount of the variance in fear beyond that accounted for by the cognitive vulnerability variables. However, the vulnerability variables accounted for between 20% and 51% of the variance in all animals fears beyond that accounted for by perceptions of the animals as looming. Perceptions of dangerousness, uncontrollability and unpredictability were highly predictive of the uneven distribution of animal fears.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This study provides support for the Cognitive Vulnerability Model of the etiology of specific fears and phobias and brings into question the utility of the harm-looming model in explaining animal fear.</p> http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-244X/7/68
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Armfield Jason M
spellingShingle Armfield Jason M
Understanding animal fears: a comparison of the cognitive vulnerability and harm-looming models
BMC Psychiatry
author_facet Armfield Jason M
author_sort Armfield Jason M
title Understanding animal fears: a comparison of the cognitive vulnerability and harm-looming models
title_short Understanding animal fears: a comparison of the cognitive vulnerability and harm-looming models
title_full Understanding animal fears: a comparison of the cognitive vulnerability and harm-looming models
title_fullStr Understanding animal fears: a comparison of the cognitive vulnerability and harm-looming models
title_full_unstemmed Understanding animal fears: a comparison of the cognitive vulnerability and harm-looming models
title_sort understanding animal fears: a comparison of the cognitive vulnerability and harm-looming models
publisher BMC
series BMC Psychiatry
issn 1471-244X
publishDate 2007-12-01
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The Cognitive Vulnerability Model holds that both clinical and sub-clinical manifestations of animal fears are a result of how an animal is perceived, and can be used to explain both individual differences in fear acquisition and the uneven distribution of fears in the population. This study looked at the association between fear of a number of animals and perceptions of the animals as uncontrollable, unpredictable, dangerous and disgusting. Also assessed were the perceived loomingness, prior familiarity, and negative evaluation of the animals as well as possible conditioning experiences.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>162 first-year University students rated their fear and perceptions of four high-fear and four low-fear animals.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Perceptions of the animals as dangerous, disgusting and uncontrollable were significantly associated with fear of both high- and low-fear animals while perceptions of unpredictability were significantly associated with fear of high-fear animals. Conditioning experiences were unrelated to fear of any animals. In multiple regression analyses, loomingness did not account for a significant amount of the variance in fear beyond that accounted for by the cognitive vulnerability variables. However, the vulnerability variables accounted for between 20% and 51% of the variance in all animals fears beyond that accounted for by perceptions of the animals as looming. Perceptions of dangerousness, uncontrollability and unpredictability were highly predictive of the uneven distribution of animal fears.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This study provides support for the Cognitive Vulnerability Model of the etiology of specific fears and phobias and brings into question the utility of the harm-looming model in explaining animal fear.</p>
url http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-244X/7/68
work_keys_str_mv AT armfieldjasonm understandinganimalfearsacomparisonofthecognitivevulnerabilityandharmloomingmodels
_version_ 1725821364607123456