"Bilateral stiumulation" ineffective...again

Author
Lytle, Richard A; Hazlett-Stevens, Holly; Borkovec, T.D.

Title
Efficacy of eye movement desensitization in the treatment of cognitive intrusions related to a past stressful event.

Source
Journal of Anxiety Disorders. Vol 16(3) 2002, 273-288.
Elsevier Science, US

Abstract
The present investigation of Eye Movement Desensitization (EMD) effectiveness included undergraduate students reporting current intrusive cognitions concerning a traumatic event. 45 participants (mean age 18.89 yrs) received a single treatment session of either: (1) EMD, as described by F. Shapiro (1989), (2) an identical procedure which employed eye fixation on a stationary target, or (3) non-directive counseling. Standardized self-report, subjective rating, Daily Diary, and intrusive thought sampling measures were collected before and after treatment. Results indicate that participants in the eye fixation group reported marginally fewer cognitive intrusions than the non-directive group 1 wk following treatment. No significant differences between the EMD and non-directive conditions or between the EMD and eye fixation conditions on this measure were found. During the treatment session, both desensitization groups were superior to the non-directive group in reducing reported vividness of the mental image of the original event. However, the non-directive group improved to the level of the other 2 groups by the following week. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved)

Replies:

Re: Initial response, by Sandra Paulsen Inobe, PhD, 10/12/02 Re: Initial response, by Ricky Greenwald, 10/13/02 Re: Initial response, by Tomas Gould, 10/13/02 Re: Initial response, by Sandra Paulsen Inobe, PhD, 10/15/02 Re: Initial response, by Tomas Gould, 10/17/02 Re: Initial response, by Sandra Paulsen Inobe, PhD, 10/17/02 Re: Initial response, by Tomas Gould, 10/18/02 Re: Initial response, by JT Stratten, 10/14/02 Re: Initial response, by JT Stratten, 10/15/02 Re: Initial response, by Sandra Paulsen Inobe, PhD, 10/15/02 Re: Initial response, by JT Stratten, 10/17/02 Re: Research Standards , by Sandra Paulsen Inobe PhD, 10/17/02 Re: Research Standards (continued), by Sandra Paulsen Inobe, PhD, 10/17/02 Re: Double talk and double standards, by JT Stratten, 10/17/02 Re: Double talk and double standards, by , 10/19/02 Re: Double talk and double standards, by JT Stratten, 10/21/02 Re: Double talk and double standards, by , 10/21/02 Re: Double talk and double standards, by JT Stratten, 10/21/02 Re: Double talk and double standards, by Ricky Greenwald, 10/22/02 Re: Double talk and double standards, by JT Stratten, 10/23/02 Re: Double talk and double standards, by Ricky Greenwald, 10/23/02 Re: Double talk and double standards, by JT Stratten, 10/23/02 Re: Double talk and double standards, by Ricky Greenwald, 10/24/02 Re: Research Standards (continued), by Sandra Paulsen Inobe, PhD, 10/17/02 Eye Movements vs. Fixed Eye Conditions, by Ulrich Lanius, Ph.D., 10/20/02 Re:Eye Movements vs. Fixed Eye Conditions, by JT STratten, 10/21/02 Notice to Readers, by Sandra Paulsen Inobe, PhD, 10/22/02 Re:Eye Movements vs. Fixed Eye Conditions, by Ulrich Lanius, Ph.D., 10/23/02 Re:Eye Movements vs. Fixed Eye Conditions, by JT Stratten, 10/23/02 Re:Eye Movements vs. Fixed Eye Conditions, by Shawn Cahill, 10/26/02 Re:Eye Movements vs. Fixed Eye Conditions, by Ulrich Lanius, Ph.D., 10/27/02 Re:Eye Movements vs. Fixed Eye Conditions, by Cahill, 10/28/02 Re:Eye Movements vs. Fixed Eye Conditions, by Ulrich Lanius, Ph.D., 11/01/02 Re: EMDR research ?, by NEW EMDR client, 10/13/02

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

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