Re:Point/Counterpoint Article Posted Online

Hi. Two points.

First of all, the treatment fidelity issue has now been convincingly addressed in the Maxfield and Hyer paper. In their study of other studies, EMDR as well as CBT both did consistently better when there was better adherence to the respective protocols. So I don't see why we need to keep arguing about this.

Secondly, I think that at this point, the eye movement issue is a red herring. I don't know why so many people have been doing component analysis studies, who cares about this stuff? Don't we need to find out, first, whether EMDR is better than the other leading brands (e.g, Prolonged Exposure)? If it's not better in some way (e.g. more effective and/or more efficient), then the components don't matter. And if it is better, then the components do matter, but then people would have no business smearing EMDR anymore; the focus would be on finding out why it's better, not whether it's different.

So I think it makes more sense, at this point, to focus on controlled comparisons of EMDR with other leading treatments. And meanwhile I don't think anyone has to prove anything about components, it's premature.

Replies:

Re:Point/Counterpoint Article Posted Online, by Cahill, 10/28/02 Re:Point/Counterpoint Article Posted Online, by Ricky Greenwald, 10/29/02

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

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