Re:More conclusions from the new EMDR meta-analysis

Davidson's meta-anlysis may to some extent address issue of insufficient statistical power as far as the effect of bilateral stimulation is concerend, as this has in fact been one of the major issue in previous studies.

However, as it does not draw on any studies that adequately address the issue of bilateral stimulation - these have thus far not been done - it still suffers from the problem that all meta-anlayses struggle with to some extent. If I remember correctly, that was once referred to by Paul Meehl as something along the lines of "garbage in, garbage out".

With regard to publications critical of EMDR what I find consistnetly surprising that studies actually do get published that set out to support the null hypothesis, usually considered a scientific impossibility and not considered acceptable for publication in most scientific venues.

While repeated null findings certainly cast doubt, repeated null findings based on the same inadequate studies uneccessarily distort the literature.

Devilly's data, among others are ones that are questionable,as by his own report the subjects did not believe EMDR to be a viable treatment, thus raising issues about a nocebo effect.

Replies:

There are no replies to this message.

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

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