Vicarious,direct, and imaginal aversion in habit control: Outcomes,heart rates,and subjective perceptions

Direct, modeled, or imaginal shocks administered by therapist or recipient were compared as aversion techniques for 60 women college students with severe nail-biting habits. All methods increased habit control (p <.001)on self-report and objective measures but with no outcome differences among treatments. Providing mental rehearsal guidance for extralaboratory use failed to alter outcome but raised client optimism to ward therapy. Vicarious aversion produced the most rapid heart rates and, typically, the greatest subjective arousal; no data suggested that direct shock was superior. In a second study with unselected student volunteers of both sexes, modeled shock consistently surpassed imaginal shock in ratings of perceived badness, subjective discomfort, and vividness of covert pain (p <.01).Treatment and ethical implications were discussed.We are indebted to Lisa Obstfeld, who performed ably as the long-suffering model, and to Albert Bandura, Mary Gabrielson, Glenn M. White, and Louis Zimmer, who assisted with other matters. Part of this research was completed while all authors were at the University of Arizona, Tucson.