{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027165932452276064, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0022026431718061676, 'mean_word_length': 5.112107623318385, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Examining the nature of fear of flying.

BACKGROUND
The nature of fear of flying (FOF) is not well understood. It is commonly assumed to be a fear learned from flight-specific experiences. However, existing literature suggests that FOF is a manifestation of fears of other stimuli (e.g., heights) embedded in the flying situation, but not specific to it. This study compared the level of prediction of FOF attained from flight-specific conditioning experiences (specifically, classical conditioning experiences in direct, observational, and verbal modes) with the level of prediction attained from flight-embedded fears.


METHODS
There were 109 university students who completed the Flight Anxiety Situations Questionnaire (FAS) and the Fear Survey Schedule, Version III (FSS) as well as demographic and flying experience questionnaires built for this study.


RESULTS
All FOF measures were highly predicted by at least one flight-embedded fear. Conversely, conditioning experiences predicted only four of five FOF measures and this prediction was not strong. In general, conditioning experiences did not behave as in previous studies of conditioning and fear.


DISCUSSION
The results suggest that FOF is based more on several flight-embedded innate fears than on learned fears. The implications of these results for FOF emergence and prevention are discussed.