Cognitive processing and acrophobia: Validating the Heights Interpretation Questionnaire

Abstract

Three studies were conducted to examine the psychometric properties of a new scale: the Heights Interpretation Questionnaire (HIQ). This scale was designed to measure height fear-relevant interpretation bias to help assess the relationship between biased interpretations and acrophobia symptoms. Studies 1 (N = 553) and 2 (N = 308) established the scale’s factor structure and convergent and discriminant validity among two large undergraduate samples. Study 3 (N = 48) evaluated the predictive validity of the HIQ by examining how well the scale predicted subjective distress and avoidance on actual heights. Factor analysis resulted in four distinct factors, and results suggest that each of the factors, along with the full HIQ, have good reliability and validity. Additionally, the scale predicts subjective distress and avoidance on heights beyond self-reported acrophobia symptoms. Overall, the HIQ shows promise as a new tool to investigate cognitive processing biases in acrophobia.

Within- and Between-Session Prefrontal Cortex Response to Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy for Acrophobia

“…Each participant was pre-screened for the fear of heights using HAQ (Cohen, 1977 ). Only participants with a medium of fear of heights, who scored higher than one-third of the questionnaire scores, but lower than three-thirds (mean score above 41 = 30% and below 90) were invited to participate (Steinman and Teachman, 2011 ). Participants were also excluded from this study if they had suffered an epileptic episode, have felt unwell during a VR or 3D cinema experience, often suffer from a migraine, or have skin that is excessively sensitive and thus might get damaged by sensors.…”

Visuo-vestibular contributions to anxiety and fear

“…The traditional psychological view regarding fears states that people have interpretation, attention and judgment biases that lead to danger overestimation, and a lack of confidence in coping with anxiety in certain situations (e.g., Arntz et al, 1995;Steinman and Teachman, 2011). A maladaptive schema causes these misinterpretations.…”

Reaching new heights: Comparing interpretation bias modification to exposure therapy for extreme height fear.

“…For example, they report higher estimates of the likelihood of falling from heights and higher estimates of the probability of injury resulting from heights compared to non-phobic control participants (Menzies & Clark, 1995; Williams & Watson, 1985). Additionally, height-fearful individuals tend to interpret ambiguous situations related to heights in a negative way, and this negative interpretation bias has been shown to predict fear and avoidance on actual heights (Steinman & Teachman, 2011). The current study expands on this correlational research by attempting to directly modify height fear-relevant threat interpretations and examining the effects on subsequent height fear.…”