Systematic desensitization
Systematic desensitization is a behavior therapy technique developed by South African psychiatrist Joseph Wolpe in the late 1950s, aimed at reducing fears, phobias, and anxiety reactions through gradual exposure. The therapy involves three main steps: first, teaching clients to achieve deep muscle relaxation; second, constructing an anxiety hierarchy that ranks situations from least to most anxiety-inducing; and third, guiding clients to imagine these situations while maintaining a state of relaxation. This method is grounded in the principle of reciprocal inhibition, where the experience of relaxation competes with feelings of fear, as one cannot be both relaxed and afraid simultaneously.
The therapy has been found effective for various anxiety-related issues, and is often enhanced by real-life exposure to the situations that were previously fear-inducing. Additionally, variations of systematic desensitization may include alternative responses to relaxation, such as humor or assertive behavior, depending on the client's needs. While initial studies demonstrated significant improvements for clients, interest in systematic desensitization has waned in favor of other therapeutic approaches, including cognitive-behavioral therapy and technological applications like virtual reality. Nevertheless, it remains a significant historical technique in the treatment of anxiety disorders and has been adapted for use in animal behavior therapy.
Systematic desensitization
- TYPE OF PSYCHOLOGY: Learning; psychological methodologies; psychopathology
- Systematic desensitization is a behavior therapy based on principles of Pavlovian conditioning. It was developed by the South African psychiatrist Joseph Wolpe in the late 1950s. It is used in the treatment of fears, phobias, and anxiety reactions.
Introduction
Systematic desensitization, also called graduated exposure therapy, is a behavior therapy used in the treatment of fears, phobias, and anxiety disorders. The therapist asks the client to imagine successively more fear- or anxiety-arousing situations while engaging in a behavior, generally relaxation, that competes with being afraid or anxious. With treatment, the client’s fear or anxiety reactions gradually subside. Therapeutic intervention is warranted when the intensity of the fear or anxiety is disproportionate to the actual situation, interferes with normal functioning, or affects the quality of life.
Systematic desensitization involves three steps. First, the therapist teaches the client the technique of deep muscle relaxation or some other response that is incompatible with fear or anxiety. Deep muscle relaxation training involves first learning to distinguish between relaxed and tense states of different skeletal muscle groups and then learning to achieve deep muscle relaxation on command without tightening the muscles. Second, the therapist helps the client construct an anxiety hierarchy in which situations are ordered from least to most anxiety-evoking. Multiple hierarchies may be needed if a client has several problems, and the hierarchies may be modified if new concerns arise during treatment. Third, the therapist instructs the client to maintain a state of relaxation while imagining a scene from the anxiety hierarchy as it is described by the therapist (imaginal exposure). Therapy begins with the item on the hierarchy that elicits the least discomfort and advances to the next item only after the client can reliably relax to the presentation of the preceding item. Each scene is imagined for a few seconds at a time. If the client experiences an increase in fear while imagining a scene, the therapist instructs the client to discontinue imagining the fear-eliciting item and to concentrate on relaxing. The third step may be done under hypnosis.
The goal of systematic desensitization is to replace the anxiety associated with an item on the anxiety hierarchy with a new and competing response, such as relaxation. The premise underlying this treatment is that a person cannot be simultaneously afraid and relaxed. For example, physiological correlates of fear, such as rapid heartbeat and increased respiration rate, are the opposite of those associated with deep muscle relaxation, in which the heartbeat and breathing rate are slowed. During therapy, a client will also be encouraged to confront in real life (in vivo exposure) the imagined situations that no longer elicit fear in the treatment sessions.
Clinical psychologists Peter Lang and David Lazovik, along with others, conducted a number of laboratory studies of systematic desensitization in the 1960s using snake-phobic college students. One study of twenty-four snake-phobic students reported that students benefited significantly from their treatment both in the short term and at a six-month follow-up, as measured by avoidance of an actual snake and self-ratings. Moreover, there was no evidence of symptom substitution, a concern Freudian psychoanalysts had expressed about the treatment of the overt manifestation of anxiety (fear and avoidance of snakes) rather than what they believed to be the underlying unconscious and unresolved conflict (anxiety about sex).
Subsequent research has shown that the essential component in systematic desensitization is repeated exposure to situations or stimuli that elicit fear or anxiety, but with no actual negative consequences for the client. Exposure is generally considered one of the most powerful and dependable methods for reducing or eliminating human fears and anxiety, and is the key element in the behavioral component of cognitive behavior therapy.
History
Systematic desensitization was developed by the South African psychiatrist Joseph Wolpe during the 1950s, based on counterconditioning experiments he did with cats in 1947–48 at the University of Witwatersrand. After using classical (Pavlovian) conditioning to make cats afraid of their cages, Wolpe demonstrated that their conditioned fear response could be eliminated by feeding the cats at locations progressively closer to their cages. This finding confirmed a 1924 report of counterconditioning by Mary Cover Jones, a student of the behaviorist John Broadus Watson, who successfully extinguished a young boy’s fear of rabbits by very gradually moving a rabbit toward the boy as he ate.
In developing a method for extinguishing human fears, Wolpe modified and shortened the progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) method perfected by the physician Edmund Jacobsen in the 1930s, which could take more than two hundred hours to master. Wolpe also pioneered the idea that treatment of anxiety elicited by an imagined situation would transfer to its real-life counterpart. In Psychotherapy by Reciprocal Inhibition (1958), Wolpe reported that 90 percent of his clients showed significant improvement with systematic desensitization.
Underlying Theory
Wolpe’s observations of his fearful cats learning to eat in the presence of gradually incremented anxiety-evoking cues convinced him that eating inhibited their fear reactions. He formulated the principle of reciprocal inhibition: when an animal eats in the presence of a fear stimulus, an inhibitory connection is strengthened between the fear stimulus and the fear reaction. Thus, if a response (fear) is inhibited by an incompatible response (eating) and followed by reinforcement (for example, a reduction in drive), a significant amount of conditioned inhibition of the fear response will develop to the fear-eliciting stimulus. The theoretical influences of the Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov and the American psychologist Clark L. Hull are evident in Wolpe’s concept of reciprocal inhibition.
Reciprocal inhibition is a defining feature of the widely accepted dual-process theory of motivation. According to this theory, there are two motivational systems underlying behavior: one that is appetitive, or positive, and one that is aversive, or negative. Activation of the positive motivational system inhibits the negative motivational system, and vice versa. Such reciprocal inhibitory links explain why an anxious person or fearful animal generally has no appetite.
Clinical psychologists Michael D. Spiegler and David C. Guevremont summarize additional explanations for why systematic desensitization works, including simple extinction; changes in the client’s thinking, such as being more realistic, having altered expectations, or increased self-confidence; and attention from the therapist.
Variations
Relaxation is the most frequently used competing response in systematic desensitization but it is not always optimal for some clients. Children, for example, may find it easier to use pleasant thoughts or humor and laughter as responses incompatible with anxiety. Other competing responses that may, under some conditions, be more appropriate than relaxation are sexual arousal, assertive behavior, and eating.
Fear or anxiety is the most common response to be treated with systematic desensitization, but treatment of other negative reactions including anger, jealousy, motion sickness, speech disorders, and racial prejudice has been successful. In Psychotherapy by Reciprocal Inhibition, Wolpe describes the case of a twenty-seven-year-old male client, Mr. E., whose unreasonable jealousy was threatening his engagement to Celia, his girlfriend. Whenever Celia said something nice about another man, Mr. E. experienced intense feelings of jealousy that would persist for days, making him irritable and excessively critical of anything Celia did. Following several interviews and training in relaxation, an anxiety hierarchy was constructed. Treatment was conducted under hypnosis and began with the lowest disturbing item: Celia commenting that his friend John (whom Mr. E. did not view as much of a competitor) has a nice way about him. After several months of imaginal exposure and various modifications to the anxiety hierarchy, Mr. E., who by then was married to Celia, could tolerate her speaking excitedly to another young man at a party.
Advances in technology have allowed therapists to use virtual reality or computer-simulated exposure to replace in vivo exposure, which is not always practical, affordable, or safe. In a review of the research on virtual reality applications to mental health, clinical psychologists Lynsey Gregg and Nicholas Tarrier conclude that the relative effectiveness of exposure technology, in vivo exposure, and imaginal exposure has yet to be fully determined.
Comparisons
A study by clinical psychologist Gordon L. Paul compared systematic desensitization and insight-oriented psychotherapy (which focuses on the source of a phobia) for the treatment of students with severe anxieties about public speaking. In a two-year follow-up, 85 percent of those in the systematic desensitization group showed significant improvement relative to pretreatment compared with 50 percent in the psychotherapy group and 22 percent in an untreated control group. Once again, there was no evidence of symptom substitution: no one in the systematic desensitization group reported new fears.
In their 2004 paper, clinical psychologist F. Dudley McGlynn and colleagues discuss reasons for the abrupt decline in academic research interest in systematic desensitization based on relaxation in the 1970s and its reduced use in clinical practice since the 1980s. The decrease in peer-reviewed papers on systematic desensitization is attributed to a change in editorial policy toward studies using a pretreatment and posttreatment comparison to assess the effectiveness of systematic desensitization. The methodology used in such analogue desensitization studies was sharply criticized by clinical psychologists Douglas A. Bernstein and Gordon L. Paul. Their influential critique raised concerns about uncontrolled experimental demand effects and whether subjects were sufficiently phobic for meaningful conclusions to be drawn about treatment efficacy. Clinicians lost interest in systematic desensitization first because of the emergence of competing therapies, most notably flooding, implosive therapy, and participant modeling, and later because of the emergence of exposure technology and the shift toward cognitive behavior therapy.
Application to Animals
Applied animal behavior science is a field that covers research on and the treatment of behavior problems in companion animals or other domestic animals. Counterconditioning has been used to treat a variety of fear-related behavioral problems in dogs, including fear of other dogs, humans, and loud noises (such as thunderstorms, fireworks, and gunshots). A common protocol for treating a noise phobia usually involves exposing the fearful dog to increasingly louder prerecorded presentations of the sound that elicits fear while simultaneously playing with the dog and rewarding with treats for maintaining a calm and relaxed demeanor. As in systematic desensitization, the dog starts exposure training with a low-intensity sound that elicits negligible anxiety and is exposed to an increment in the intensity of the fear-eliciting stimulus only when the dog remains completely relaxed at the preceding volume.
Bibliography
Bernstein, Douglas A., and Gordon L. Paul. “Some Comments on Therapy Analogue Research with Small Animal “Phobias”.” Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 225–37, doi.org/10.1016/0005-7916(71)90038-3. Accessed 10 Dec. 2024.
Butler, Rynae, et al. “The Efficacy of Systematic Desensitization for Treating the Separation-Related Problem Behaviour of Domestic Dogs.” Applied Animal Behaviour Science, vol. 129, no. 2-4, 2011, pp. 136–45, doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2010.11.001. Accessed 10 Dec. 2024.
Dexter, Geralyn. "What Is Systematic Desensitization Therapy and How Does It Work?" VeryWell Mind, 5 Aug. 2024, www.verywellhealth.com/systematic-desensitization-5214330. Accessed 10 Dec. 2024.
Dubord, Greg. “Part 12. Systematic Desensitization.” Canadian Family Physician Medecin de Famille Canadien, vol. 57, no. 11, 2011, p. 1299.
Gregg, Lynsey, and Nicholas Tarrier. “Virtual Reality in Mental Health: A Review of the Literature.” Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology: The International Journal for Research in Social and Genetic Epidemiology and Mental Health Services, vol. 42, no. 5, 2007, pp. 343–54, doi.org/10.1007/s00127-007-0173-4. Accessed 10 Dec. 2024.
Hoffman, S., and F. Gotlieb. “Flooding and Desensitization in Treating OCD: A Case Study.” International Journal of Psychotherapy, vol. 18, no. 1, 2014, pp. 27–34.
Iglesias, Alex, and Adam Iglesias. “I-95 Phobia Treated with Hypnotic Systematic Desensitization: A Case Report.” The American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, vol. 56, no. 2, 2013, pp. 143–51.
Jie Chen, et al. “A Study on the Impact of Systematic Desensitization Training on Competitive Anxiety among Latin Dance Athletes.” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 15, 2024, doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1371501. Accessed 10 Dec. 2024.
Lang, Peter J., and A. David Lazovik. “The Experimental Desensitization of a Phobia.” Experiments in Behaviour Therapy, 1964, pp. 40–50, doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-010054-8.50007-1. Accessed 10 Dec. 2024.
McGlynn, F. Dudley, et al. “Comment on the Status of Systematic Desensitization.” Behavior Modification, vol. 28, no. 2, 2004, pp. 194–205.
McLeod, Saul. "Systematic Desensitization Therapy In Psychology." Simply Psychology, 2 Feb. 2024, www.simplypsychology.org/systematic-desensitisation.html. Accessed 10 Dec. 2024.
Paul, Gordon L. “Insight versus Desensitization in Psychotherapy Two Years after Termination.” Journal of Consulting Psychology, vol. 31, no. 4, 1967, pp. 333–48, doi.org/10.1037/h0024855. Accessed 10 Dec. 2024.
Spiegler, Michael D. Contemporary Behavior Therapy. 6th ed., Cengage Learning, 2016.
Wolpe, Joseph. Psychotherapy by Reciprocal Inhibition. Stanford UP, 1958.