Flipbook

CHAPTER 3 76 Table 2. Pearson r correlations between pre- to post-test changes in contamination, fear of contamination, danger, disgust, and threat belief ratings; df = 66, all p s < .001. Fear Danger Disgust Threat belief Contamination .77 .67 .88 .58 Fear .76 .77 .50 Danger .68 .44 Disgust .45 E+RP vs. E+SB: time course of effects. Figure 2 depicts the CFDD ratings at the pre-test (trial 0), and before and after wiping (E+SB) or the 30s delay (E+RP) at each exposure trial. The curves suggest that the largest reductions in CFDD took place in the first trials. When looking at the ratings immediately after touching the contaminant, the curves indeed followed a quadratic trend over Time, F s(1,42) > 68.67, p s < .001, η p 2 s > .62, for all four measures. These quadratic trends were stronger in the E+SB condition than in the E+RP condition for contamination and disgust, indicated by Time x Condition interactions in quadratic trends, F s(1,42) > 5.31, p s < .03, η p 2 s > .11. These interactions were not significant for fear of contamination and danger, F s(1,42) < 0.21, p s > .65. As can be seen in Figure 2, CFDD ratings in the E+SB condition increased slightly from trial 19 to trial 20, when participants did not use a wipe after touching the contaminant. These increases were significant for contamination, fear, and disgust, F s(1,21) > 6.90, p s < .02, η p 2 s > .24, and showed a trend for danger, F (1,21) = 4.00, p = .059, η p 2 = .16. However, CFDD ratings did not differ between the E+SB and E+RP condition in trial 20, t s(42) < 0.68, p s > .50. Figure 2 also depicts the immediate effects of wiping (E+SB) and waiting (E+RP) at each exposure trial. The E+SB curve shows a distinct saw tooth pattern, whereas this pattern is less pronounced in the E+RP curve. Compared to the ratings immediately after touching the contaminant, decreases in CFDD ratings were larger