A methodological critique of the current status of Eye Movement Desensitization (EMD)

Lohr, Jeffrey M.; Kleinknecht, Ronald A.; Conley, Althea T.; Cerro, Steven Dal; Schmidt, Joel E.; Sonntag, Michael E.

doi:10.1016/0005-7916(92)90032-e

Cited by 73 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The participants started to question the provided information, whereas they believed it at first. These results contrast the view held by several previous authors that beneficial effects of EMDR treatment are incidental and can be explained by credibility, expectancy, or experimental demand (Devilly, 2005; Herbert et al, 2000; Lohr et al, 1992, 1999). …”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…Both psychotherapy outcome expectancy and treatment credibility are shown to be positively related to treatment outcomes (Constantino, Arnkoff, Glass, Ametrano, & Smith, 2011; Taylor, 2003). With regard to EMDR specifically, previous authors have asserted the view that beneficial effects of the treatment are incidental and might be explained by credibility, expectation for improvement, experimental demand, therapist enthusiasm, and therapist allegiance (Devilly, 2005; Herbert et al, 2000; Lohr et al, 1992; Lohr, Lilienfeld, Tolin, & Herbert, 1999). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Exploring expectation effects in EMDR: does prior treatment knowledge affect the degrading effects of eye movements on memories?

Littel

Schie

Hout

2017

European Journal of Psychotraumatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) is an effective psychological treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder. Recalling a memory while simultaneously making eye movements (EM) decreases a memory’s vividness and/or emotionality. It has been argued that non-specific factors, such as treatment expectancy and experimental demand, may contribute to the EMDR’s effectiveness. Objective: The present study was designed to test whether expectations about the working mechanism of EMDR would alter the memory attenuating effects of EM. Two experiments were conducted. In Experiment 1, we examined the effects of pre-existing (non-manipulated) knowledge of EMDR in participants with and without prior knowledge. In Experiment 2, we experimentally manipulated prior knowledge by providing participants without prior knowledge with correct or incorrect information about EMDR’s working mechanism. Method: Participants in both experiments recalled two aversive, autobiographical memories during brief sets of EM (Recall+EM) or keeping eyes stationary (Recall Only). Before and after the intervention, participants scored their memories on vividness and emotionality. A Bayesian approach was used to compare two competing hypotheses on the effects of (existing/given) prior knowledge: (1) Prior (correct) knowledge increases the effects of Recall+EM vs. Recall Only, vs. (2) prior knowledge does not affect the effects of Recall+EM. Results: Recall+EM caused greater reductions in memory vividness and emotionality than Recall Only in all groups, including the incorrect information group. In Experiment 1, both hypotheses were supported by the data: prior knowledge boosted the effects of EM, but only modestly. In Experiment 2, the second hypothesis was clearly supported over the first: providing knowledge of the underlying mechanism of EMDR did not alter the effects of EM. Conclusions: Recall+EM appears to be quite robust against the effects of prior expectations. As Recall+EM is the core component of EMDR, expectancy effects probably contribute little to the effectiveness of EMDR treatment.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring expectation effects in EMDR: does prior treatment knowledge affect the degrading effects of eye movements on memories?

Littel

Schie

Hout

2017

European Journal of Psychotraumatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, SUD ratings were employed by Wolpe only as an index of the client's emotional state during treatment application, otherwise known as a "process" variable. Researchers (Lohr, Kleinknecht, Conley, Dal Cerro, Schmidt, & Sonntag, 1992;Rogers, Silver, Gross, Obenchain, Willis, & Whitney, 1999) have identified several reasons why SUD ratings cannot be used as measures of treatment efficacy for EMDR, and the same criticism can be applied with equal force to their use in TFT. Treatment effectiveness requires the application of normative, validated measures of symptoms specific to the disorders treated (Foa & Meadows, 1997).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Sakai et al. is not an adequate demonstration of TFT effectiveness

Lohr

2001

J Clin Psychol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sakai et al. (2001) report an uncontrolled case series of TFT treatments applied to a wide range of psychological complaints in a large health maintenance facility. They analyze verbal report measures of symptom severity and conclude that the specific treatment is effective for a wide range of psychological problems. A review of the theory and research on TFT efficacy indicates that the theoretical basis for the specific treatment is unfounded and that adequately controlled efficacy research has yet to be conducted. The authors' conclusions about effectiveness and applicability are not supported by either theory, prior research, or the findings of their clinical application.

show abstract

“…Dit kan een voordeel betekenen voor mensen die er moeite mee hebben om over hun ervaringen te praten, maar ook als de communicatie door taalproblemen moeizaam verloopt, bijvoorbeeld bij getraumatiseerde buitenlandse vluchtelingen. Hoewel de resultaten met EMDR bijzonder hoopgevend zijn, moeten we ons realiseren dat het een zeer recente ontwikkeling betreft en meer gecontroleerde studies noodzakelijk zijn om deze procedure op haar waarde voor de psychotherapiepraktijk te kunnen beoordelen (Lohr et al, 1992 ;Herbert & Mueser, 1992). Een kanttekening van Shapiro dient hier niet onvermeld te blijven.…”

Section: Beschouwingunclassified

Een nieuwe behandelingsmethode voor angst en trauma's: ‘Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing’

Jongh¹,

Broeke²

1993

DITH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A methodological critique of the current status of Eye Movement Desensitization (EMD)

Cited by 73 publications

References 21 publications

Exploring expectation effects in EMDR: does prior treatment knowledge affect the degrading effects of eye movements on memories?

Exploring expectation effects in EMDR: does prior treatment knowledge affect the degrading effects of eye movements on memories?

Sakai et al. is not an adequate demonstration of TFT effectiveness

Een nieuwe behandelingsmethode voor angst en trauma's: ‘Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing’

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About