The present study was conducted in response to increasing concerns about the potential unreliability of retrospective accounts in assessing the origins of fears and phobias. Some investigators have questioned the reliability of retrospective reports at a single assessment point, although the test-retest reliability of such accounts has yet to be examined. The aim of the present study was to conduct a one-year follow-up of the subclinical driving-fearful sample studied by Taylor and Deane (Taylor, J.E., & Deane, F.P. (1999) to primarily investigate the stability of fear onset ascriptions and fear severity over time. 85 respondents completed a questionnaire which assessed fear origins, anxiety response patterns, and additional fear-relevant events occurring over the year. The results suggest that retrospective accounts of fear onset may be quite unstable over time, although this instability does not clearly appear to be related to intervening events, and limitations of the study make these results inconclusive. Fear-relevant negative thinking worsened over time, while physiological reactions and general anxiety remained relatively stable. The theoretical, methodological and clinical implications of the findings are discussed, along with suggestions for future research. (A)
Abstract