Abstract
A number of explanations of systematic desensitization have been suggested, each claiming some supportive evidence. The purpose of this paper is not to evaluate this experimental support, but to examine the logical structure of the explanations themselves. Many prove to be no more than loose, metaphorical statements, or models incongruent with clinical desensitization. The extinction explanation seems to have some precision, so the sort of empirical validation it would require is considered in some detail. Extinction as a low-level model is also contrasted with reciprocal inhibition as a higher-order construct for explaining response decrement. It is concluded that greater attention should be given to the formal structure of explanatory propositions so they may more effectively guide relevant research and clinical practice.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
