Research, with the context left in
Looking for a reliable number about phobias? Start here. These 15 findings come with the details that make a statistic meaningful: who was studied, when, and what was measured.
Compiled by Conquer Phobias · Sources checked
For the plain-language explanation, read fear versus phobia.
The adult estimates below describe specific phobia—not every ordinary fear, and not all anxiety disorders combined.
9.1%
“Past year” means the year before the interview, not the current year.
NCS-R, reported by NIMH · Methods and limits
Select the text above to copy it, including the source and caveat.
12.5%
Lifetime and past-year estimates answer different questions.
NCS-R, reported by NIMH · Methods and limits
Select the text above to copy it, including the source and caveat.
12.2%
Categories follow the source’s reporting; this does not explain why the difference exists.
NCS-R, reported by NIMH · Methods and limits
Select the text above to copy it, including the source and caveat.
5.8%
A lower group estimate says nothing about an individual’s need for help.
NCS-R, reported by NIMH · Methods and limits
Select the text above to copy it, including the source and caveat.
19.3%
Do not compare this directly with the adult past-year estimate.
Merikangas et al., NCS-A (2010) · Methods and limits
Select the text above to copy it, including the source and caveat.
These estimates come from one cross-national analysis. They should not be averaged with the US figures above.
7.4%
Keep “surveyed countries” in any quotation; do not label it a current global rate.
Wardenaar et al., World Mental Health Surveys (2017) · Methods and limits
Select the text above to copy it, including the source and caveat.
5.5%
This is not evidence of an increase or decrease since the US survey.
Wardenaar et al., World Mental Health Surveys (2017) · Methods and limits
Select the text above to copy it, including the source and caveat.
9.8%
Compare only with the matching lifetime estimate for male respondents.
Wardenaar et al., World Mental Health Surveys (2017) · Methods and limits
Select the text above to copy it, including the source and caveat.
4.9%
Use the study’s population and time window when citing this figure.
Wardenaar et al., World Mental Health Surveys (2017) · Methods and limits
Select the text above to copy it, including the source and caveat.
An onset estimate describes a group, not a deadline. A fear that starts later still deserves attention.
8 years
A median is a midpoint, not a prediction for a particular person.
Wardenaar et al., World Mental Health Surveys (2017) · Methods and limits
Select the text above to copy it, including the source and caveat.
18.7%
The denominator is people with phobia, not all survey participants.
Wardenaar et al., World Mental Health Surveys (2017) · Methods and limits
Select the text above to copy it, including the source and caveat.
21.9%
Do not treat severity categories as labels for someone reading this page.
NCS-R, reported by NIMH · Methods and limits
Select the text above to copy it, including the source and caveat.
30%
Do not combine severity estimates from different studies.
NCS-R, reported by NIMH · Methods and limits
Select the text above to copy it, including the source and caveat.
Getting care, finding it helpful, and recovering are different outcomes. Keep the denominator and definition with each number.
13.7%
The study’s treatment definition was broad, and Table 1 applies timing restrictions. This is not a current service-access rate.
de Vries et al., World Mental Health Surveys (2021) · Methods and limits
Select the text above to copy it, including the source and caveat.
47.5%
This is not a cure rate or the success rate of any particular therapy.
de Vries et al., World Mental Health Surveys (2021) · Methods and limits
Select the text above to copy it, including the source and caveat.
These bars use the same 0–100% scale. They compare groups within a study—not change over time. Labels follow the studies' reporting.
Same survey and time window. NCS-R, 2001–2003; reported by NIMH.
Same analysis and time window. Wardenaar et al. (2017); surveys 2001–2011.
Reuse the comparisons with their source, population, and survey dates attached. The figures are the researchers' findings; Conquer Phobias compiled and presented them.
We haven't added a percentage for every named fear. A small study of people seeking treatment cannot tell us how common a fear is in the whole population. A poll about being nervous on a plane doesn't establish the prevalence of aerophobia.
We'll add individual-fear findings when we can explain exactly what the study measured. Until then, explore our phobia explanations without a misleading league table of “most common” fears.
We traced the findings to original survey research and NIMH's government summary. The US adult figures are presented through NIMH, which links the original papers and Harvard tables; we don't claim to have conducted this research.
This first edition is a selected collection, not a systematic review or a claim that no newer evidence exists. Estimates are rounded as reported. Different methods, populations, diagnostic definitions, and recall periods can produce different results. These studies should not be pooled into a new average.
Published: 2005 paper; 2007 prevalence tables. Survey dates: 2001–2003.
Household diagnostic interviews using DSM-IV criteria. Historical estimates, not a measurement of today’s population.
Where to check: Adult prevalence and impairment sections; original research references 1–3.
Published: 2010. Survey dates: 2001–2004.
National adolescent survey using DSM-IV criteria. A separate survey from the adult study; do not read the difference as a trend.
Where to check: Results: prevalence of individual disorders. Cross-checked against NIMH.
Published: 2017. Survey dates: 2001–2011.
25 population surveys; 124,902 respondents; DSM-IV diagnostic interviews. A cross-national estimate, not a census of everyone worldwide. Surveys overlap with some US research above.
Where to check: Abstract: Methods and Results.
Published: 2021. Survey dates: Varied by survey; includes 2002–2006 and 2016–2017 survey waves.
Retrospective reports; treatment analyses restricted to first treatment in 1990 or later. Not a trial of CBT or exposure therapy. Helpfulness was self-reported, not measured recovery.
Where to check: Methods: Survey samples; Table 1 and its footnotes. Full survey dates: supplemental Table 1.
The 2021 treatment paper has inconsistent country counts between its abstract and Methods; we therefore do not quote a country total for that analysis. Its timing restrictions and broad definition of professional help are important when interpreting the treatment figures.
Conquer Phobias. “Phobia statistics: what research actually shows.” Published and sources checked 12 September 2026. conquerphobias.com/phobia-statistics/. Cite the original study alongside this compilation when using a number.
Dates change only after an actual source check or content update. New findings will be added with their study details, rather than replacing an old number just to make the page look fresh. This is an editorial source check, not a clinical review.
12 September 2026: First edition, with 15 findings and two within-study comparisons.