EMDR FORUM ARCHIVE, 2000
Re:Scientific Jargon vs. reality
McFall · 12/26/02 at 2:57 PM ET
The Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology published a meta-analysis review of the EMDR literature (Davidson & Parker, 2001). Following computerised literature searches for studies published between 1988 and 2000 examining the effects of EMDR, Davidson and Parker selected 34 group comparison studies that had been carried out into the effectiveness of EMDR. Unlike more traditional literature reviews, metaanalysis is a statistical technique that allows the researcher to aggregate the different results of lots of studies and reach an overall conclusion. Davidson and Parker (2001) concluded: “In sum, EMDR appears to be no more effective than other exposure techniques, and evidence suggests that the eye movements [the bls] integral to the treatment, and to its name, are unnecessary." (p.305) My own view is that when psychotherapies do work, it's more often b/c of the therapist/client relationship--that faith, love, hope thing--and that’s not a necessarily a bad thing in my view...maybe it’s a gift we don't fully appreciate or understand yet.
Replies:
| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |
Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.
