Search

In his commentary on my article comparing Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) with animal magnetism therapy (McNally, 1999a), Greenwald (this issue) expresses several criticisms. Unable to refute a single factual statement, he resorts to attacking my rhetorical style. The purpose of this reply is to rebut his critique.

Research on Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing therapy (EMDR) was reviewed to answer the questions "Does EMDR work?" and "If so, Why?" This first question was further subdivided on the basis of the control group: (a) no-treatment (or wait list control), (b) nonvalidated treatments, and (c) other validated treatments. The evidence supports the following general conclusions: First, EMDR appears to be effective in reducing at least some indices of distress relative to no-treatment in a number of anxiety conditions, including posttraumatic stress disorder, panic disorder, and public-speaking anxiety. Second, EMDR appears at least as effective or more effective than several nonvalidated treatments (e.g., relaxation, active listening) for posttraumatic stress reactions. Third, despite statements implying the contrary, no previously published study has directly compared EMDR with an independently validated treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder (e.g., therapist-directed flooding). In the treatment of simple phobia, participant modeling has been found to be more effective than EMDR. Fourth, our review of dismantling studies reveals there is no convincing evidence that eye movements significantly contribute to treatment outcome. Recommendations regarding further research directions are provided.

The growing body of research into treatment efficacy with Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) has, by-and-large, been limited to evaluating treatment components or comparing a specific treatment against wait-list controls. This has led to two forms of treatment, Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) and Cognitive-Behavior Therapy (CBT), vying for supremacy without a controlled study actually comparing them. The present research compared EMDR and a CBT variant (Trauma Treatment Protocol; TTP) in the treatment of PTSD, via a controlled clinical study using therapists trained in both procedures. It was found that TTP was both statistically and clinically more effective in reducing pathology related to PTSD and that this superiority was maintained and, in fact, became more evident by 3-month follow-up. These results are discussed in terms of past research. Directions for future research are suggested.

In the past years, Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) has become increasingly popular as a treatment method for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The current article critically evaluates three recurring assumptions in EMDR literature: (a) the notion that traumatic memories are fixed and stable and that flashbacks are accurate reproductions of the traumatic incident; (b) the idea that eye movements, or other lateralized rhythmic behaviors have an inhibitory effect on emotional memories; and (c) the assumption that EMDR is not only effective in treating PTSD, but can also be successfully applied to other psychopathological conditions. There is little support for any of these three assumptions. Meanwhile, the expansion of the theoretical underpinnings of EMDR in the absence of a sound empirical basis casts doubts on the massive proliferation of this treatment method.

This paper considers the current empirical status of Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) as a treatment method for specific phobias, along with some conceptual and practical issues in relation to its use. Both uncontrolled and controlled studies on the application of EMDR with specific phobias demonstrate that EMDR can produce significant improvements within a limited number of sessions. With regard to the treatment of childhood spider phobia, EMDR has been found to be more effective than a placebo control condition, but less effective than exposure in vivo. The empirical support for EMDR with specific phobias is still meagre, therefore, one should remain cautious. However, given that there is insufficient research to validate any method for complex or trauma related phobias, that EMDR is a time-limited procedure, and that it can be used in cases for which an exposure in vivo approach is difficult to administer, the application of EMDR with specific phobias merits further clinical and research attention.

Incremental validity and incremental efficacy have become important issues in the evaluation of psychological assessment and intervention procedures. Incremental validity in assessment is that shown by novel measures over and above established ones. Incremental efficacy is that shown by novel treatments over and above nonspecific and established treatment effects. In this paper, we critically examine the question of whether Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) possesses efficacy above and beyond nonspecific treatment effects and components that are shared with well-established interventions. A review of recently published efficacy studies reveals that (a) the effects of EMDR are largely limited to verbal report indices, (b) eye movements and other movements appear to be unnecessary, and (c) reported effects are consistent with nonspecific treatment features. Examination of individual studies shows that control procedures for nonspecific features have been minimal. We analyze EMDR for nonspecific treatment features and suggest experimental controls to examine the incremental efficacy of EMDR.

To better understand the pathophysiology and treatment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), standard psychological testing, Rorschach Ink Blot testing, and neuroimaging using Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT) were administered to subjects with PTSD prior to and following three sessions of Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR). Using this within-subject design, data from one of six subjects in our series is presented as a case report. Following EMDR, the subject experienced improvement in his level of distress, which correlated with decrements in PTSD and depressive symptomatology on psychological testing. Analysis of the Rorschach data corroborated these changes. Among other findings, the Hypervigilance Index went from positive to negative, indicating that the subject was spending less time scanning the environment for threats, and available ego resources also increased, as measured by the Experience Actual variable. Upon recall of the traumatic memory during SPECT scanning, two areas of the brain were hyperactive post-EMDR treatment relative to pretreatment: the anterior cingulate gyrus and the left frontal lobe. These changes were consistent with summed data from four out of six subjects in the ongoing study. An important implication of these findings is that successful treatment of PTSD does not reduce arousal at the limbic level, but instead, enhances the ability to differentiate real from imagined threat. The psychology and neurophysiology of PTSD are discussed in greater detail.

Four recent, independent, rigorously controlled studies of Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) have reported that 84 to 100% of single-trauma victims no longer maintain the posttraumatic stress disorder diagnosis after the equivalent of three 90-minute sessions. The rapidity of EMDR treatment effects makes many ancillary research opportunities available. Specifically, the increased number of cases resolved in a relatively short period of time allows investigation of neurophysiological phenomena, patterns of cognitive and emotional processing, component analyses of a large range of procedural factors, and evaluation of the efficacy of application to diverse clinical populations. Unfortunately, some research has been conducted that has been severely hampered by insufficient treatment fidelity and lack of clinical validity. Consequently, this article will attempt to describe the procedures and protocols that are believed to contribute to EMDR's clinical effects and are, therefore, suggested for the EMDR treatment and research of the anxiety disorders. This is particularly relevant given the misconceptions that have abounded due to the unfortunate naming of the procedure after the eye movements, which have proved to be only one of many useful types of stimulation, and only one of many components of this complex, integrated treatment.

In their 1996 paper, Bates, McGlynn, Montgomery, and Mattke were critical of eye-movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) as an effective method of behavior therapy. The present commentary challenges the Bates et al. review of the literature, and the implementation of EMDR used in reaching their conclusions. Evidence is offered to support the clinical use of EMDR.

Two spider phobics were first treated with Eye-Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) and then received an exposure in vivo session. Results showed positive effects of EMDR, but also suggest that it is especially self-report measures that are sensitive to EMDR. Improvement on a behavioral measure was less pronounced and exposure was necessary to eliminate residual avoidance behavior. This observation confirms the position of those EMDR critics who point out that EMDR effects should be documented with objective and standardized evaluation instruments.

Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), a new technique that has shown some promise in the treatment of traumatic memories, was evaluated in this pilot study. Subjects were seven clients suffering from panic disorder who received EMDR treatment for memories of past and anticipated panic attacks and other anxiety-evoking memories of personal relevance. Standardized self-report inventories and behavioral monitoring instruments were employed to measure change with treatment. After five sessions of EMDR, subjects reported a considerable decrease in the frequency of panic attacks, fear of experiencing a panic attack, general anxiety, thoughts concerning negative consequences of experiencing anxiety, fear of body sensations, depression, and other measures of pathology.

The relative efficacy of Eye-Movement Desensitization (EMD) and Eye- Focus Desensitization (i.e., a treatment procedure designed to control for the effects of eye movement) in treating multiple phobias was assessed along behavioral, cognitive, and physiological response channels in a single-subject, multiple-baseline design across fear areas. Continuous physiological measurements, rather than presession/post- session change scores, were employed to permit accurate, fine-grained analysis of each intervention's effects. Results indicated that EMD failed to produce clinically significant intra- and intersession improvements beyond those produced by the control procedure on all dependent measures. A second multiple-baseline design across fear areas was implemented with the same subject and employed in vivo exposure/reinforced practice in order to demonstrate the patient's potential responsiveness to treatment. This procedure produced dramatic improvement on behavioral and subjective measures, but not on physiological indices. Results from this single-case experiment did not support the effectiveness of EMD.

A protocol for utilizing commercially available videocassette movies (VM) in assessments is presented. Methods focus on using phobia-relevant segments of a VM in behavioral assessment tests with video (BATVs). Case histories of three patients using BATVs are described. Methods of selecting a VM topic that is relevant to a patient's phobia, and the importance of using short VM segments in BATVs are presented. Possible future uses of BATVs and other video applications (e.g., prescribing the in-home viewing of certain VMs for self-paced desensitization) are briefly discussed.

A cluster analytic investigation was conducted on measures of PTSD associated features (e.g., personality pathology, dissociative tendencies) to investigate whether empirically-defined clusters correspond to Herman's [1992, Complex PTSD: a syndrome in survivors of prolonged and repeated trauma. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 5, 377-391; 1997, Trauma and recovery (Rev. ed.). New York: Basic Books] distinction between simple and complex PTSD. Results from a sample of 60 PTSD patients were broadly consistent with this distinction, although some inconsistencies were observed. Treatment outcome generally did not differ between the two clusters. Implications for classifying and treating PTSD are discussed.

A counterconditioning model is presented from which the behavioral treatment prolonged exposure counterconditioning (PEC) was developed. The first part of a PEC session is intended to increase trauma exposure tolerance and counter numbing symptoms, the second to elicit trauma responses fully, and the third to weaken trauma responses. The first client with chronic posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) who was treated with PEC is presented. A statistical technique for analyzing single-case subject designs was used to evaluate the treatment. PEC effectively decreased the client's PTSD and associated psychopathology. Crucial differences between PEC and other behavioral treatments are discussed. An associative functional model is presented as a potentially useful conceptualization of PTSD, depression, and other anxiety disorders.

Food neophobia is an eating disturbance defined as the fear of trying new foods. In its extreme, the disorder can lead to malnutrition, limited social functioning, and psycholo gical difficulties. Successful treatment of food neophobia in children has been reported, but if those children are not provided with treatment, it stands to reason that the disorder may follow them into adulthood. To date, adult cases have not been described in the literature and the prevalence in adults is unknown. Our paper will review the methods used to treat children with the disorder, then delineate how the procedures were modified for an adult population, giving two case examples.

Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing was introduced by Frances Shapiro (1989) as a treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder. When controlled studies failed to support the extraordinarily positive findings and claims made by Shapiro, proponents of EMDR raised the issue of treatment fidelity and criticized researchers for being inadequately trained. This paper considers the issues raised by EMDR proponents. It is concluded that treatment fidelity has been used as a specious, distracting issue that permits the continued promotion of EMDR in the face of negative empirical findings. Clinical psychologists are urged to remember the basic tenets of science when evaluating extraordinary claims made for novel techniques.

This report summarizes data gathered thus far from an ongoing study. Two groups (total N = 12) of Vietnam War veterans diagnosed with Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) received a single session of exposure or Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) focusing on the veterans' most distressing war experience. Group assignment was random, treatment providers were blind to assessment data, and the pre- and posttreatment assessor was blind to treatment assignment. Both groups showed improvement on the Impact of Event Scale. EMDR treatment resulted in greater positive changes in within-session Subjective Units of Discomfort levels and on self-monitored severity of intrusive recollection. A trend toward decreased heart rate reactivity was observed in both groups. Results must be considered carefully due to the small number of subjects used in the study.

The literature regarding the immediate and long term reactions of victims of rape is reviewed. Anxiety, as well as depression, is commonly observed. The latter response declines within a three month period for most victims, whereas fear reactions appear to be more persistent. Social and sexual functioning are substantially disrupted immediately following the rape and tend to return to pre-rape levels after a few months, although sexual satisfaction remains low up to 18 months later. Implications of these findings regarding theoretical questions and treatment planning are discussed. Few predictions of response to rape have been identified; among these are history of psychiatric treatment of victimization and of recent life stresses, as well as inadequate social support. With respect to treatment, several cognitive/behavioral procedures and combinations of procedures have been found effective, including desensitization, cognitive therapy, and stress inoculation training. Flooding appears to be a promising treatment for rape victims, but has not yet been evaluated in a controlled study. Suggestions for future research are offered with respect to methodology, the search for predictors, and treatment comparisons.