Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 11:18, 12 February 2025

Revision as of 11:18, 12 February 2025

Line 25:

EMDR adds a number of non-scientific practices to [[exposure therapy]].<ref name="non">{{cite book |page=292 |vauthors= Lohr JM, Gist R, Deacon B, Devilly GJ, Varker T |chapter=Chapter 10: Science- and Non-Science-Based Treatments for Trauma-Related Stress Disorders |publisher=Routledge |veditors=Lilienfeld SO, Lynn SJ, Lohr JM |title=Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology |edition=2nd |year=2015 |isbn=9781462517893|quote="...eye movements and other bilateral stimulation techniques appear to be unnecessary and do not uniquely contribute to clinical outcomes. The characteristic procedural feature of EMDR appears therapeutically inert, and the other aspects of this treatment (e.g., imaginal exposure, cognitive reappraisal, in vivo exposure) overlap substantially with those of exposure-based treatments for PTSD...EMDR offers few, if any, demonstrable advantages over competing evidence-based psychological treatments. Moreover, its theoretical model and purported primary active therapeutic ingredient are not scientifically supported."}}</ref> EMDR is classified as one of the "power therapies" alongside [[thought field therapy]], [[Emotional Freedom Techniques]] and others{{snd}}so called because these therapies are marketed as being superior to established therapies which preceded them.<ref name=ros2012>{{cite book |vauthors=Rosquist J |isbn=9781136915772 |publisher=Routledge |year=2012 |title=Exposure Treatments for Anxiety Disorders: A Practitioner's Guide to Concepts, Methods, and Evidence-Based Practice |page=92}}</ref>

EMDR has been characterized as [[pseudoscience]], because the underlying theory and primary therapeutic mechanism are [[Falsifiability|unfalsifiable]] and non-scientific. EMDR's founder and other practitioners have used [[Pseudoscience#Falsifiability|untestable hypotheses]] to explain studies which show no effect.<ref name=ps-in_promotion>{{cite book |chapter=Chapter 4: Pseudoscience in Treating Adults Who Experienced Trauma |title=Science and Pseudoscience in Social Work Practice |vauthors=Thyer BA, Pignotti MG |year=2015 |publisher=Springer |page=221 |doi=10.1891/9780826177698.0004 |isbn=9780826177681|quote=Nevertheless, to date, given that there is no evidence that anything unique to EMDR is responsible for the positive outcomes in comparing it to no treatment and the florid manner in which it has been marketed, we are including it in this book... Another way in which EMDR qualifies as a pseudoscience is the manner in which it was developed and marketed... EMDR proponents have come up with ad hoc hypotheses to explain away unfavorable results that do not support its theory, which is one of the hallmark indicators of a pseudoscience... This type of post hoc explanation renders her theory unfalsifiable and thus places it outside the realm of science, because to qualify as scientific, a theory must be falsifiable.}}</ref> The results of the therapy are non-specific, especially if directed eye movements are irrelevant to the results. When these movements are removed, what remains is a broadly therapeutic interaction and deceptive marketing.<ref name="Herbert" /><ref name=Devilly2002>{{cite journal | vauthors = Devilly G |title=Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing: a chronology of its development and scientific standing |journal=The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice |date=2002 |volume=1 |issue=2 |pages=132|url=http://devilly.org/Publications/EMDR-review.pdf}}</ref> According to neurologist [[Steven Novella]]:

{{blockquote|[T]he false specificity of these treatments is a massive clinical distraction. Time and effort are wasted clinically in studying, perfecting, and using these methods, rather than focusing on the components of the interaction that actually work.<ref name = "SBM" >{{cite web | vauthors = Novella S | author-link = Steven Novella |title=EMDR and Acupuncture – Selling Non-specific Effects |url=https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/emdr-and-acupuncture-selling-non-specific-effects/ |department=Science Based Medicine |publisher=Society for SBM |date=March 30, 2011 |access-date=12 July 2020}}</ref>}}

Investigation into EMDR has been characterised by poor-quality studies, rather than tightly-controlled trials that could justify or falsify the mechanisms that have been proposed to support it. Novella writes that the research quantity nevertheless means that EMDR has claimed a place among accepted treatments and is "not likely going away anytime soon, even though it is a house of card built on nothing".<ref name="f445">{{cite web | title=EMDR Is Still Dubious | publisher=Science-Based Medicine | date=23 October 2024 | url=https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/emdr-is-still-dubious/ | vauthors=Novella S}}</ref>

EMDR has been characterised as a modern-day [[mesmerism]], as the therapies have striking resemblances, from the sole inventor who devises the system while out walking, to the large business empire built on exaggerated claims. In the case of EMDR, these have included the suggestions that EMDR could drain violence from society and be useful in treating [[cancer]] and [[HIV/AIDS]].<ref name="tsep">{{cite book |title=[[The Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience]] |vauthors=Rosen GM, McNally RJ, Lilienfield SO |publisher=Bloomsbury |year=2002 |isbn=978-1-57607-653-8 |veditors=Shermer M, Linse P |volume=1 |pages=321–326 |chapter=EMDR: Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing}}</ref> Psychology historian Luis Cordón has compared the popularity of EMDR to that of other cult-like pseudosciences, [[facilitated communication]] and [[thought field therapy]].<ref name=cordon/>

A parody website advertising "sudotherapy" created by a fictional "Fatima Shekel" appeared on the internet in the 1990s.<ref name="The Psychologist_2007">{{cite journal | vauthors = de Jongh A, ten Broeke E |title=A course in pseudoscience |journal=De Psycholoog |date=February 2007 |pages=87–91 |url=https://www.dousa.nl/DePsycholoogFebr2007letters.pdf |access-date=15 April 2023}}</ref><ref name="McNally_Dutch">{{cite journal | vauthors = McNally RJ |title=emdr en mesmerisme |journal=DTH Magazine |date=2001 |volume=3 |issue=21 |url=https://www.directievetherapie.nl/artikelen/jaargang21/emdr-en-mesmerisme-21-3-270/ |access-date=15 April 2023 |language=Dutch}}</ref><ref name=ps-in_sudotherapy/> Proponents of EMDR described the website as libelous, since the website contained an image of a pair of shifting eyes following a cat named "Sudo", and "Fatima Shekel" has the same initials as EMDR's founder, Francine Shapiro.<ref name=ps-in_sudotherapy/> However, no legal action took place against the website or its founders.<ref name=ps-in_sudotherapy>{{cite book |chapter=Chapter 1: Characteristics of Science and Pseudoscience in Social Work Practice |title=Science and Pseudoscience in Social Work Practice |vauthors=Thyer BA, Pignotti MG |year=2015 |publisher=Springer |doi=10.1891/9780826177698.0004 |isbn=9780826177681}}</ref>

== Research ==