A comparison of in-vivo and imaginal participant modeling

Recent research indicates that effective treatments of phobic reactions are often performance-based and involve exposure to the phobic object. The present study was designed to determine whether both of these components were necessary for the effectiveness of participant modeling procedures (N = 26). Phobic individuals were assigned randomly to one of two forms of participant modeling: In-vivo vs. imaginal. Both treatment analogues were identical except that the in-vivo version involved actual exposure to a phobic object, while the imaginal version simply required individuals to imagine that the phobic object was physically present. Results on behavioral and self-report measures indicated that both in-vivo and imaginal participant modeling were effective in generating increased approach behavior, but neither produced generalization beyond the laboratory setting. Explanations were discussed.