Effectiveness and Limitations of Systematic Desensitization
Systematic desensitization has shown considerable success in treating learned fears and specific phobias. Research indicates that this approach can significantly reduce both physiological and self-reported fear levels.
Example: Capafons et al. (1998) found that clients with a fear of flying exhibited fewer physiological signs of fear and reported lower fear levels after a 12-15 week treatment period using both in vivo and in vitro techniques.
Key points on effectiveness:
- Success rates for systematic desensitization and exposure therapies range from 75-80% (McGrath et al., 1990; Marks, 1990).
- In vivo procedures tend to be more effective than in vitro desensitization.
- The approach is particularly successful for overcoming learned problems and specific phobias.
However, systematic desensitization vs exposure therapy has some limitations:
- It may not be appropriate for all types of phobias, especially those rooted in ancient fears or involving intangible stimuli (e.g., ghosts).
- There is a risk of symptom substitution, where eliminating one symptom may lead to the appearance of others.
- High dropout rates have been observed in some studies.
Highlight: While systematic desensitization can effectively treat symptoms, it may not address the underlying causes of phobias or anxiety disorders.
Ethical considerations make systematic desensitization preferable to more intense methods like flooding:
- The gradual approach allows clients to progress at their own pace.
- Anxiety is controlled throughout the process, making it more ethical.
- Clients can provide informed consent and have the freedom to withdraw at any point.
Quote: "The progressive structure of SD allows the patient to control the steps they must make until fear is overcome."




