The distinction between thick-skinned and thin-skinned deformation is not especially interesting because all orogenic belts encompass both styles, and because in practice there is no sharp rheological divide between crystalline and supracrustal sedimentary rocks.

Dear Zao, 

It is true that many orogenic belts show both styles of deformation, but what do we understand for thin- and thick-skinned deformation?

Thin-skinned deformation is considered as that developed along efficient detachment leves such as evaporites and overpressured shales. But  more importantly, developed along large thrust flats that allow for considerable amounts of horizontal displacement and shortening. This type of deformation is considered by some authors as "flat-dominated" shortening. 

On the other hand, thick-skinned deformation is considered as that where "basement" is involved. Some authors prefer to refer to this style as "ramp-dominated" shortening, contrary to the "flat-dominated" one. Ramp-dominated deformation (i.e., thick-skinned) can account for considerable uplift, rather than horizontal displacement. In other cases tough, large thrust flats transporting crystalline basement have been recognised (in the European Alps, for instance). 

Most orogens display this thick-skinned deformation in the hinterlad parts, whereas thin-skinned deformation is concentrated toward the foreland. Some orogens also display "ramp-dominated", thick-skinned deformation ahead of the thin-skinned thrust front, in the foreland. Such foreland deformation indicates the existance of large flat detachment in the crystalline basement, in order to transfer the shortening from the hinterland toward the foreland along deeper structural levels. 

Therefore, there are substantial differences between both styles, in terms of rheology, kinematics, activation mechanisms, structural styles, timing of thin- vs. thick-deformation, and so on. This has considerable implications in terms of seismic hazard, and the exploration of natural resources.

A considerable amount of research has been carried out on this matter. You can check recent review papers from Lacombe and Bellahsen (2016) or Pfiffer (2016), in a special issue of the Geological Magazine journal.  In the same volume, Granado et al. (2016) provide also an example from the Alpine-Carpathian Junction, were both styles have been recognised.

Best regards,

Lacombe and Bellahsen (2016) (http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=10290124&fulltextType=RA&fileId=S0016756816000078), 

Pfiffer (2016): http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=10129669&fulltextType=RA&fileId=S0016756815001090

Granado et al. (2016): http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=10197643&fulltextType=RA&fileId=S0016756816000066

Pablo

Because you received alredy a good answer) I think this paper will help you  also)) and the refernces inside will  be  usefull too. good  luck!

Tavani, S., Storti, F., Lacombe, O.,Corradetti, A., Muñoz, J.A., Mazzoli, S. 2015. A review of deformation pattern templates in foreland basin systems and fold-and-thrust belts: Implications for the state of stress in the frontal regions of thrust wedges. Earth-Science Reviews 141 , 82–104

Yevgeniya