Contemporary studies: Capafons et al. (1998); Prot (2014) or Bastian et al. (2011)

Introduction to Contemporary Studies

In this chapter, we look at how the learning theories you have already studied (like Classical Conditioning and Social Learning Theory) are applied in modern research. These "contemporary" studies help psychologists understand how we can treat phobias and how modern media—like video games and social media—influences our behavior.

You need to know Capafons et al. (1998) as your compulsory study, and then either Prot (2014) or Bastian et al. (2011), depending on which one your teacher has chosen. We will cover all three here so you are fully prepared!

1. Capafons et al. (1998): Systematic Desensitisation for Fear of Flying

This study is a direct application of Classical Conditioning. If a person can "learn" to be afraid of flying, can they "unlearn" it using Systematic Desensitisation (SD)?

The Aim

To investigate whether Systematic Desensitisation is an effective treatment for aerophobia (fear of flying).

The Procedure

The researchers used a group of \(41\) participants who had a fear of flying.
1. They were split into two groups: the Treatment Group (\(20\) people) who received SD, and a Waiting List Control Group (\(21\) people) who did not receive treatment yet.
2. Before the treatment, everyone’s fear levels were measured using scales like the IDG-F (a fear of flying questionnaire) and physical measures like heart rate while watching a video of a flight.
3. The treatment group had \(12\) to \(15\) sessions of SD. They learned relaxation techniques and created a fear hierarchy (a list of flying-related situations from least scary to most scary). They then worked through this hierarchy while staying relaxed.
4. After the sessions, both groups were tested again to see if their fear had decreased.

The Findings

The results were very clear:
- The Treatment Group showed a massive reduction in fear. For example, on the fear scales, their scores dropped significantly.
- The Waiting List Group showed almost no change in their fear levels.
- Only \(2\) of the \(20\) people in the treatment group did not show improvement.

Key Takeaway & Evaluation

Conclusion: Systematic Desensitisation is a highly effective and reliable treatment for the fear of flying.
- Generalisability: This study is helpful for people with specific phobias, but might not apply to more complex mental health issues.
- Objectivity: The researchers used quantitative data (scores on scales and heart rate), which makes the results more objective and less open to bias.
- Validity: The study has high internal validity because they used a control group to prove it was the treatment—not just the passing of time—that cured the phobia.

2. Prot (2014): Media and Prosocial Behavior

This study focuses on Social Learning Theory. It asks: If violent media makes people aggressive, can prosocial media (media that helps others) make people kinder?

The Aim

To see if playing prosocial video games or watching prosocial TV leads to an increase in empathy and prosocial behavior over time.

The Procedure

This was a longitudinal study, meaning it followed the same people over a long period (about \(2\) years). They looked at over \(3,000\) children and adolescents from \(7\) different countries (including Singapore and various Western nations).
- Participants reported their media habits (how often they played helpful games).
- They also completed measures of empathy (feeling what others feel) and prosocial behavior (helping others).

The Findings

The researchers found a "virtuous cycle." Children who played prosocial games at the start of the study became more empathetic over time. This increased empathy then led to more helpful, prosocial behaviors in real life. This effect was consistent across different cultures.

Key Takeaway & Evaluation

Conclusion: Media doesn't just influence us in the short term; long-term exposure to positive media can actually change our personality and behavior for the better.
- Reliability: Because the same results were found in \(7\) different countries, the findings are considered very reliable.
- Validity: Since it was a longitudinal study, it has better predictive validity—it shows how behavior changes over years, not just minutes.
- Subjectivity: A weakness is that it relied on self-report (questionnaires). Some children might have answered in a way that made them look better than they actually are (social desirability bias).

3. Bastian et al. (2011): Cyber-dehumanization

This study looks at the darker side of Social Learning Theory and video games.

The Aim

To investigate if playing violent video games causes dehumanization—the process of seeing yourself or others as "less than human" or more like robots/animals.

The Procedure

The researchers conducted experiments where participants played either a violent video game (like Mortal Kombat) or a non-violent game (like Top Spin Tennis) for \(15\) minutes.
- After playing, participants rated themselves and their opponents on "humanity" traits (like having feelings, warmth, and depth).

The Findings

The results showed that those who played the violent games:
1. Saw themselves as less human (lower self-humanity).
2. Saw their opponents as less human (dehumanization of others).
This did not happen to the people playing the tennis game.

Key Takeaway & Evaluation

Conclusion: Violent video games can diminish our sense of humanity, making it easier to view people as objects. This might explain why violent media is linked to increased aggression.
- Objectivity: The study was a laboratory experiment, meaning it was highly controlled and objective.
- Ecological Validity: A weakness is that playing a game for \(15\) minutes in a lab is very different from playing for hours at home with friends. The ecological validity is quite low.
- Reliability: Because the procedure was so standardised, it is very easy for other researchers to repeat the study to check the results.

Quick Revision: Comparison Table

Common Mistakes to Avoid

- Mixing up the studies: Remember, Capafons is about therapy (fixing a problem), while Prot and Bastian are about media effects (how entertainment changes us).
- Ignoring the "Contemporary" label: These are modern studies. In the exam, if a question asks for a contemporary study of learning theories, do NOT use Watson and Rayner (Little Albert)—that is the classic study!
- Confusing the media studies: Prot is the "Positive" one (Prosocial), Bastian is the "Bad" one (Dehumanization).

Don't worry if the term "dehumanization" or "longitudinal" feels heavy at first. Just remember: Dehumanization = treating people like robots; Longitudinal = a long-term study over years.