Systematic Desensitisation

    Cards (11)

    • Strength:
      It is preferred therapy when patients are given the option to choose.
      Not stressful unlike flooding. SD does not cause high levels of distress and is considered to be a more ethical treatment method. This is due to the gradual exposure unlike flooding which exposes the patient to the phobia very quickly.
      Suggests that it has a lower refusal rate and lower drop out rate than flooding.
    • Weakness:
      Time consuming Treatment.
      SD can take many sessions to complete. Therefore, could take years to unlearn a response.
      This may also be costly as the client may have to pay for these sessions.
      Suggests that SD may not be appealing as a treatment, as it leaves people suffering much longer than flooding.
    • McGrath et al (1990) found that 75% of patients with phobias were successfully treated using SD.
    • Gilroy et al (2002) who examined 42 patients with arachnophobia (fear of spiders), found SD effective even 33 months later.
    • Systematic desensitisation is not effective in treating all phobias, like the fear of heights.
    • SD is very patient-centred making it more ethical.
    • Wechsler et al (2019) concluded that SD is effective for specific phobia, social phobia and agoraphobia.
    • SD can have positive effects with people with learning difficulties, as they struggle with cognitive therapies.
    • Virtual reality can be used in SD so people do not need to leave the therapy room.
    • Virtual reality can also be more cost effective in SD.
    • Systematic desensitisation is often thought to be more successful than flooding as the patient is in control of their progress, not the therapist.