The Etiology of Phobias: a Nonassociative Account

Theories of the origin and maintenance of fears and phobias have had a profound influence on the kinds of treatments employed in the phobic disorders. In view of this influence, the present review considers the considerable controversy surrounding the major etiological models. First, the various forms of the associative learning account are examined. It is argued that each of these approaches has failed to provide a comprehensive account of the onset of the phobic disorders. Second, evidence for a nonassociative account is considered. It is argued that this latter model can more adequately account for the majority of experimental and clinical findings in most phobic conditions. Future directions for research on the etiology of phobias are discussed. INCREASINGLY, clinicians and researchers alike are recognising the need to collect informat ion about the origins of phobic cases as a standard par t o f initial assessment. This informat ion enables the researcher to evaluate the relevance of the various theoretical approaches, and may provide useful data for the clinician who must choose an appropr ia te t rea tment strategy. It has been argued that different modes of onset may lead to different individual response pat terns and result in differential response to s tandard t reatments (Rachman, 1977). Thus, theories of the origin and main tenance of fears and phobias continue to have a p ro found influence on the kinds of t reatments employed with phobic patients. It is largely in view of this influence that the present pape r focuses on the major etiological accounts, beginning with a review of the traditional condi t ioning model and the psychoanalytic account that it sought to replace. Correspondence should be addressed to Ross G. Menzies, Department of Behavioural Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, P.O. Box 170, Lidcombe, New South Wales, 2141, Australia.