The effects of eye movements and alternative dual tasks on the vividness and emotionality of negative autobiographical memories: A meta-analysis of laboratory studies

IF 1 4区 医学 Q4 PSYCHIATRY Journal of Experimental Psychopathology Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1177/2043808720907744
Sanne T. L. Houben, H. Otgaar, J. Roelofs, H. Merckelbach, P. Muris
{"title":"The effects of eye movements and alternative dual tasks on the vividness and emotionality of negative autobiographical memories: A meta-analysis of laboratory studies","authors":"Sanne T. L. Houben, H. Otgaar, J. Roelofs, H. Merckelbach, P. Muris","doi":"10.1177/2043808720907744","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Performing eye movements during memory retrieval is considered to be important for the therapeutic effect of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR). We conducted a meta-analysis of laboratory studies that compared the effects of eye movements and/or alternative dual tasks (e.g., counting) on the vividness and emotionality of negative autobiographical memories with recall only (control) conditions. The databases PsycINFO and Web of Science were queried. Fifteen studies that involved 942 participants were included. Eye movements and alternative dual tasks produced similar vividness and emotionality decreases, with the impact on vividness being strong than that on emotionality. However, eye movements yielded a stronger overall vividness reduction than alternative dual tasks, although the associated effect size was small (Cohen’s d = .29). Because eye movements and alternative dual tasks produced comparable effects, one might conclude that both tasks are therapeutic equivalents. However, it should be acknowledged that only a limited number of laboratory studies were included in our meta-analysis, and the degree to which both procedures tax working memory was not independently established. Although our conclusion cannot be generalized to clinical practice, it does raise questions about the mode of action of EMDR.","PeriodicalId":48663,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychopathology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2043808720907744","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychopathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2043808720907744","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

Performing eye movements during memory retrieval is considered to be important for the therapeutic effect of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR). We conducted a meta-analysis of laboratory studies that compared the effects of eye movements and/or alternative dual tasks (e.g., counting) on the vividness and emotionality of negative autobiographical memories with recall only (control) conditions. The databases PsycINFO and Web of Science were queried. Fifteen studies that involved 942 participants were included. Eye movements and alternative dual tasks produced similar vividness and emotionality decreases, with the impact on vividness being strong than that on emotionality. However, eye movements yielded a stronger overall vividness reduction than alternative dual tasks, although the associated effect size was small (Cohen’s d = .29). Because eye movements and alternative dual tasks produced comparable effects, one might conclude that both tasks are therapeutic equivalents. However, it should be acknowledged that only a limited number of laboratory studies were included in our meta-analysis, and the degree to which both procedures tax working memory was not independently established. Although our conclusion cannot be generalized to clinical practice, it does raise questions about the mode of action of EMDR.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
眼动和替代性双重任务对负性自传体记忆生动性和情绪性的影响:实验室研究的荟萃分析
在记忆检索过程中进行眼动被认为对眼动脱敏和再处理(EMDR)的治疗效果很重要。我们对实验室研究进行了荟萃分析,比较了眼动和/或替代性双重任务(如计数)对负面自传体记忆的生动性和情绪性的影响,以及仅回忆(对照)条件。对PsycINFO和Web of Science数据库进行了查询。15项研究涉及942名参与者。眼动和交替双重任务产生了相似的生动性,情绪性下降,对生动性的影响大于对情绪性的影响。然而,尽管相关的影响很小(Cohen的d=.29),但眼动比替代双重任务产生了更强的整体生动性降低。由于眼动和替代双重任务的效果相当,因此可以得出结论,这两项任务都是等效的治疗任务。然而,应该承认的是,我们的荟萃分析中只包括了有限数量的实验室研究,而且这两种程序对工作记忆征税的程度并不是独立确定的。尽管我们的结论不能推广到临床实践中,但它确实对EMDR的作用模式提出了疑问。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Experimental Psychopathology
Journal of Experimental Psychopathology Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychopathology (EPP) is an open access, peer reviewed, journal focused on publishing cutting-edge original contributions to scientific knowledge in the general area of psychopathology. Although there will be an emphasis on publishing research which has adopted an experimental approach to describing and understanding psychopathology, the journal will also welcome submissions that make significant contributions to knowledge using other empirical methods such as correlational designs, meta-analyses, epidemiological and prospective approaches, and single-case experiments.
期刊最新文献
Linking maladaptive food avoidance and anorexia nervosa symptoms: An analogue study Approach and Conquer: Optimizing Fear Extinction by Adding Approach? “If I feel disgusted, I will become fat”: Disgust-based emotional reasoning in the context of weight and shape concerns No Evidence for Decreased Generalization of Fear Extinction in High-Trait Anxious Individuals Long-term memory for faces in dysmorphic concern and self-reported body dysmorphic disorder
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1