Researcher shows SD is effective in the treatment of phobias. Gilroy et al followed up 42 patients who've been treated for spider phobias in three 45 minute sessions of systematic desensitisation
Gilroy et al procedure
Spider phobias assessed through spider Questionnaire and response to a real spider. Control group treated by relaxation without exposure. At both 3 months/33 months after treatment the SD group was less fearful than relaxation group. Shows SD is helpful in relaxing anxiety
It is suitable for a diverse range of patients (SD)
Alternatives to SD (flooding and cognitive therapies) not well-suited for all patients. Some patients may have learning difficulties making it hard to understand what is happening during flooding or engage in cognitive therapies to reflect. SD is more appropriate
It is acceptable to patients (SD)
Patients prefer SD. In a choice between SD and flooding, patients choose SD as it involves less trauma and some elements (like the learning procedures) are pleasant. This is supported by low refusal rates and low attrition rates
It is cost-effective (Flooding)
Flooding is as effective as other treatments. Ougrin compared flooding to cognitive therapies and found flooding is highly effective and quicker than the alternatives. Patients thus are free of their symptoms as quick as possible making the treatment cheaper
It is less effective some types of phobias (Flooding)
May be less effective for social phobias due to the fact they have cognitive aspects. Sufferer thinks unpleasant thoughts about social situation so cognitive therapies may help cure the irrational thinking
The treatment is traumatic for patients (Flooding)
Flooding is highly traumatic and often patients are unwilling to see it through till the end, time and money is wasted sometimes
Symptom substitution (SD and Flooding)
A criticism of both flooding and SD is that when one phobia disappears, another one replaces it. Evidence for this is mixed however and behavioural therapists tend to not believe this