EMDR FORUM ARCHIVE, 2000
Forgotten Name
Cahill · 01/20/03 at 4:47 PM ET
You provide some interesting theoretical speculations about how eye movements and other bilateral stimuli may be associated with trauma memories, which suggests a partial rationale for why eye movements (or other bilateral stimuli) may be helpful in treatment and suggest some potential moderating variables. The problem, from my perspecitve, is that you are offering an explanation for a phenomenon that, as of yet, does not need explaining. In other words, there still isn't any convincing evidence for an effect of eye movements on the outcome of EMDR for treatment of PTSD. This is true whether you compare an eye movement group with an alternative form of laterally alternating stimuli AND it is true when you compare an eye movement condition with an eyes fixed condition in which there is no other source of laterally alternating stimuli. Thus, Shapiro's retreat from eye movements per se to the more general any form of laterally alternating stimuli does not explain why there is a lack of evidence for the role of eye movements or any other form of laterally alternating stimuli. Given all of the criticisms levied against the existing dismantling studies, my suggestion to those who really believe that eye movements (or other laterally alternating stimuli, or dual attention) is an important component to treatment with EMDR for at least some populations is to stop the speculation, role up your sleaves, and conduct some good research and find out if there is a phenomenon to be explained. Once you have demonstrated a reliable phenomenon, you can then conduct studies to identify the important parameters. This information will then help the theoriests to know what does, and does not, need explaining.
Less speculation and more data!
Replies:
|
| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |
Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.
