Covert sensitization: A generalization analysis in the laboratory and natural environment through the use of a portable-penile plethysmograph.

Abstract

Covert sensitization has been the most widely used behavioral treatment procedure to decrease deviant sexual arousal in sex offender therapy. However, it is unknown whether reductions of deviant sexual arousal in the laboratory generalize to the natural environment. This study conducted a generalization analysis of covert sensitization treatment effects to the natural environment using a portable-penile plethysmograph for a sex offender. Results indicated that deviant sexual arousal was reduced in the laboratory, but not in the natural environment. An examination of the reasons for the lack of generalization are discussed.Covert sensitization has a long history of use in treating such socially undesirable behaviors as alcoholism (

Assessing the Generalization of Relapse-Prevention Behaviors of Sexual Offenders Diagnosed With an Intellectual Disability

“…This study sheds light on the potential processes that may account for the reported lack of generalization of sexual offender treatment behaviors from the clinic to the community and other extratherapeutic settings (Marques et al, 2005; Rea et al, 2003; Rosen & Kopel, 1977). Marques et al (2005) reported some reoffenders indicated that they never implemented their relapse-prevention behaviors in the community, while Rea and his colleagues (2003) reported the lack of generalized conditioning from the laboratory to the natural environment. Although we did not evaluate reoffending in this study, we did examine a number of putative proximal measures to reoffending (O’Donohue & Letourneau, 1992).…”

“…The participants' 100% compliance during the return to the follow-up TS probe verified the level of familiarity effect and suggested that the reduced levels of compliance during the NTS and CA probes were not due to mere temporal degradation. This study sheds light on the potential processes that may account for the reported lack of generalization of sexual offender treatment behaviors from the clinic to the community and other extratherapeutic settings (Marques et al, 2005;Rea et al, 2003;Rosen & Kopel, 1977). Marques et al (2005) reported some reoffenders indicated that they never implemented their relapse-prevention behaviors in the community, while Rea and his colleagues (2003) reported the lack of generalized conditioning from the laboratory to the natural environment.…”

“…A crucial component in the treatment of sexual offenders is the transfer of behavioral skills from the treatment setting to the natural environment. Indeed, numerous authors have reported the lack of generalization of sexual offender treatment behaviors from the clinic to the community and other extratherapeutic settings (Marques, Wiederanders, Day, Nelson, & van Ommeren, 2005; Rea et al, 2003; Rosen & Kopel, 1977). Marques et al (2005) reported that a number of reoffending participants in a cognitive-behavioral treatment program that included relapse prevention indicated that they never used their self-management strategies in the community.…”

“…The disclosure of deviant behavior in which anonymity is not provided can have severe consequences for the offender that decreases the probability of reporting such acts (Abel, Mittelman, Becker, Rathner, & Rouleau, 1988). In addition, the non anonymous self-reports of offenders can be unreliable in identifying what controls sexual arousal (Hinton, O’Neil, & Webster, 1980; Quinsey, Steinman, Bergersen, & Holmes, 1975; Rea et al, 2003) and in revealing whether they have recently engaged in deviant behavior (Rosen & Kopel, 1977).…”