Virtual Reality Treatment of Fear of Heights
Summary. In this study, the researchers tested the effectiveness of virtual reality treatment for fear of heights. The single case shown in the video is a good example of the treatment used in the group study discussed here. To obtain participants, the researchers administered an acrophobia questionnaire to a large group of college students, then selected 20 students with high scores for the study (3 students did not complete the study).
Video. The segment originally aired in the Scientific American Frontiers program 21st Century Medicine (1996); the segment is entitled Virtual Fear, and is about 8 minutes long. You can show the entire segment, and then describe the group study for the class. The segment can be viewed online (as of July 2018) -- Season 6, Episode 5.
Original Reseurch. Rothbaum, B. O., et al. (1995). Effectiveness of computer-generated (virtual reality) graded exposure in the treatment of acrophobia. American Journal of Psychiatry, 152, 626-628.
Design. 2 x 2 factorial with one repeated measure.
Statistical Analysis. Students can do an independent t-test on the posttest scores, which yields t(15) = -5.46, p < .001. A 2 x 2 mixed ANOVA,(omitting subjects with missing data) yields F(1, 15) = 6.14. p = .026.
Published Results. "No pretreatment differences were detected between the group of students given treatment and those in the waiting list condition on any measure or demographic variable. . . . As can be seen, measures of anxiety, avoidance, distress . . ., and all attitudes toward heights decreased significantly from the pretreatment assessment to the posttreatment assessment for the virtual reality graded exposure treatment group but not for the waiting list comparison group." (p. 627).
Published conclusions. "In this controlled study of the application of virtual reality to the treatment of a psycho1ogical disorder, we found that students treated with virtual reality graded exposure experienced reductions in self-reported anxiety and avoidance of heights and improvements in attitudes toward heights and that students in the waiting list comparison group did not evidence any change." (pp, 627-628).
Comments. The students can see how difficult it is to evaluate the effectiveness of the treatment when only a single case is observed, compared to a group study. This segment also raises questions about dealing with subject attrition — since these are hypothetical scores, we don't really know if the person with the highest score dropped out of the study, but you can discuss how such an event might affect the validity of the study.
Data. The Excel file for this activity contains realistic total scores on the acrophobia questionnaire for the treatment and no-treatment groups (scores on the acrophobia questionnaire can range from 0 to 160, with higher scores indicating greater fear of heights).
Summary. In this study, the researchers tested the effectiveness of virtual reality treatment for fear of heights. The single case shown in the video is a good example of the treatment used in the group study discussed here. To obtain participants, the researchers administered an acrophobia questionnaire to a large group of college students, then selected 20 students with high scores for the study (3 students did not complete the study).
Video. The segment originally aired in the Scientific American Frontiers program 21st Century Medicine (1996); the segment is entitled Virtual Fear, and is about 8 minutes long. You can show the entire segment, and then describe the group study for the class. The segment can be viewed online (as of July 2018) -- Season 6, Episode 5.
Original Reseurch. Rothbaum, B. O., et al. (1995). Effectiveness of computer-generated (virtual reality) graded exposure in the treatment of acrophobia. American Journal of Psychiatry, 152, 626-628.
Design. 2 x 2 factorial with one repeated measure.
Statistical Analysis. Students can do an independent t-test on the posttest scores, which yields t(15) = -5.46, p < .001. A 2 x 2 mixed ANOVA,(omitting subjects with missing data) yields F(1, 15) = 6.14. p = .026.
Published Results. "No pretreatment differences were detected between the group of students given treatment and those in the waiting list condition on any measure or demographic variable. . . . As can be seen, measures of anxiety, avoidance, distress . . ., and all attitudes toward heights decreased significantly from the pretreatment assessment to the posttreatment assessment for the virtual reality graded exposure treatment group but not for the waiting list comparison group." (p. 627).
Published conclusions. "In this controlled study of the application of virtual reality to the treatment of a psycho1ogical disorder, we found that students treated with virtual reality graded exposure experienced reductions in self-reported anxiety and avoidance of heights and improvements in attitudes toward heights and that students in the waiting list comparison group did not evidence any change." (pp, 627-628).
Comments. The students can see how difficult it is to evaluate the effectiveness of the treatment when only a single case is observed, compared to a group study. This segment also raises questions about dealing with subject attrition — since these are hypothetical scores, we don't really know if the person with the highest score dropped out of the study, but you can discuss how such an event might affect the validity of the study.
Data. The Excel file for this activity contains realistic total scores on the acrophobia questionnaire for the treatment and no-treatment groups (scores on the acrophobia questionnaire can range from 0 to 160, with higher scores indicating greater fear of heights).