Background <p>Cervical collar application remains prevalent in trauma care despite the absence of evidence of neurological benefit from spinal immobilisation. Clinical behaviour in this area has proven resistant to change, and the persistence of the collar requires explanation beyond the evidential debate alone.</p> <p>The fear of cervical injury has origins that predate clinical practice. Neurobiological preparedness theory suggests that threat associations linked to survival-relevant stimuli are more rapidly acquired and more durably maintained than other learned fears; the cervical region is a plausible candidate for this form of prepared response. This disposition has been reinforced by centuries of cultural practice: capital punishment across civilisations has concentrated on the neck, and its apparatus has entered clinical language through terms such as the hangman's fracture and <i>coup du lapin</i>. The resulting cultural weight on cervical injury shapes illness behaviour, as demonstrated by natural experiments linking whiplash outcomes to compensation context. In the clinical setting, nocebo mechanisms may cause interventions that signal severity, including the collar, to perpetuate the disability they are designed to prevent. Cognitive biases compound this: pattern-based reasoning in high-stakes situations, defensive practice, and the availability heuristic all incline clinicians towards immobilisation regardless of the evidence. The collar may therefore function, in part, as an anxiety management device for clinician and patient alike.</p> Conclusion <p>Resistance to reforming immobilisation practice is unlikely to yield to evidence translation alone. Effective change requires explicit engagement with the evolutionary, historical, linguistic, and cognitive determinants of cervical injury fear, alongside the evidential case for gentle patient handling.</p>