Re: Reviewing the totality of the evidence against EMDR's claims

The business of reviewing literature is a very interesting one. There is a whole body of research (Mahoney et al) on the psychological processes behind reviewing literature and judging its quality. The bottom line is that when the reviewer agrees with the findings of the research, then they think that the research is "excellent." When the research they are reviewing goes against what they already believe, that same research is judged to be "inadequate." Thus if you know what a reviewer thinks or believes about the issues, you can almost always predict the "judgement" that they make of the research.

The best way to understand the research then is twofold. First review the literature yourself. We have seen that happen in this discussion. The second step, is to investigate what other groups of people have thought. In this case it may be instructive to know that Division 12 of the American Psychological Association has developed a list of treatment modalities that have empirically demonstrated validity. There are a number of modalities on the list. Cognitive Behavior Therapy is listed. EMDR is listed also. Thus it is the considered judgement of the members of this Division of the biggest association of psychologist in the world that there is empirical evidence for the effectiveness of EMDR. The International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies (the largest professional group for professionals working with traumatic stress) has recently developed a list of treatment guidelines. The ISTSS reviewed the literature (people both supportive and antagonistic to EMDR were involved) and came to the judgement that EMDR was one of the recommended treatments for EMDR. Other modalities were also listed so I do not mean to imply that EMDR was the only modality recommended, but it was reviewed and judged to be effective.
Just some input to the discussion.

Replies:

Re: Reviewing the totality of the evidence against EMDR's claims, by Brian G., 2/19/00 Re: Reviewing the totality of the evidence against EMDR's claims, by Robert P. O'Brien, Ph.D., 2/19/00 Two reasons that these claims are spurious, by James Mason, Ph.D., 2/21/00 Re: Two reasons that these claims are spurious, by Robert P. O'Brien, PH.D., 2/21/00 Re: Two reasons that these claims are spurious, by James Mason, Ph.D., 2/23/00 Still confused, by Robert P. O'Brien, Ph.D., 2/24/00 Re: Still confused, by , 5/10/00 Re: Reviewing the totality of the evidence against EMDR's claims, by Don, 2/19/00 Re: Reviewing the totality of the evidence against EMDR's claims, by Sandra Paulsen, Ph.D., 2/19/00

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.