EMDR is a relatively new therapeutic technique founded in 1987, that has helped to relieve traumatic memories. It is primarily used to access, neutralize, and bring to adaptive resolution the upsetting memories at the root of current psychological disturbances (Greenwald, 1994).

Shapiro, an unknown clinical psychology graduate student, discovered EMDR while walking through a park in California, preoccupied with old memories and disturbing thoughts. She discovered that as her eyes moved rapidly back and forth, her memories seemed to dissolve spontaneously. Amazed, she experimented with seventy volunteers, obtained similar results, and then organized a formal research study one year later (Butler, 1993).

In this study, which became her doctoral thesis, twenty-two survivors of rape, childhood abuse, and war were given one sixty-minute EMDR session. All of these participants reported that their memories had lost most of their devastating charge and that their irrational, negative self-attributions and presenting complaints had greatly improved.

This effect was maintained at a three-month and a three-year follow-up. A control group that simply called up a memory without using the eye movement showed no relief at all (Shapiro, 1989a; as cited in Greenwald, 1994).

EMDR treatment consists of eight essential phases. The number of sessions devoted to each phase and the number of phases included in each session vary from client to client. The first phase involves taking a client history to evaluate the suitability for treatment. The client’s ability to deal with high levels of disturbance, the amount of external stress in his or her life, and medical conditions are all considered. The treatment plan is then designed.

Phase two is the preparation phase, in which the clinician introduces the client to EMDR procedures, explains EMDR theory, establishes expectations about treatment effects, and prepares the client for possible between-session disturbance. At this point, clinicians often give the client an audiotape of relaxation exercises so that he or she can use it before beginning the EMDR sessions and between sessions. Guided imagery and relaxation are occasionally used during the sessions to facilitate the client’s ability to deal with the recalled memories.

Phase three is assessment, which includes identifying the memory and an image that best represents that memory. Then the client chooses a negative cognition that he or she has in relation to the event, such as “I am useless/bad/unlovable”. The client then identifies a positive cognition to replace the negative one, such as “I am worthwhile/a good person/lovable” and rates how much he or she believes this positive statement using the seven point Validity of Positive Cognition (VPC) scale. Then, the image and the negative cognition are combined, and the client rates his or her level of disturbance on the ten-point Subjective Units of Disturbance Scale (SUDS).

The fourth phase involves desensitization. The client focuses on the negative effect and follows the clinician’s rapidly moving fingers, sweeping back and forth approximately twelve to fourteen inches. The procedure is repeated in sets ranging from ten seconds to longer than a minute until the SUDS level is reduced to zero or one. Recently it has been noted that eye movement is not necessarily needed because similar results have been found by tapping alternate hands on a chair rest or broadcasting alternating tones in a client’s ear. Any of these strategies can be implemented at this point. It is also emphasized that these initial sets are often not sufficient for complete processing and that other strategies and advanced EMDR procedures may be needed to restimulate processing.

Phase five is the installation phase which focuses on cognitive restructuring. Here, the positive cognition is strengthened in order to replace the negative belief. The client holds the positive belief with the image in his or her mind and the eye movement sets are continued until the client rates the positive cognition at a six or seven on the VOC scale. After linking the positive cognition with the target memory, as associative bond is created. Thus, the client believes the positive cognition when remembering the previously disturbing image.

In phase six, the client holds the image and the positive cognition in his or her mind and scans the body in order to identify any tension. These body sensations are then targeted during the following sets of eye movements or alternative desensitization techniques.

Phase seven is closure which includes a debriefing reminding the client that he or she may experience disturbing images, thoughts, or emotions between sessions. The client is told that this is a positive sign and is often asked to keep a log or journal about negative thoughts, situations, dreams, and memories that may occur. If the client is not debriefed, there is a danger of decompensation or, in an extreme case, suicide.

Phase eight is reevaluation which is implemented at the beginning of each new session. Previously accessed targets are brought back and the client’s responses are reviewed to assess if the treatment effects have been maintained. New images or memories are then targeted following the eight-step procedure.

After the client has gone through these steps, the previously disturbing memories should be altered. The image may change in content or appearance, the sounds or voices recalled often become quieter or disappear, the client’s cognitions may become more therapeutically adaptive, and emotions and physical sensations often lessen in intensity.

After treatment, many people feel as though a slate has been wiped clean and a space created where new learning can take place (Butler, 1993). They feel as if the memory is now a part of the past.

Other positive effects are also common, such as improved competence, mood, attitude or self-appraisal. Processing may continue on a sporadic basis for days or weeks following the sessions, including increased dream activity, mood changes, memory recall, and new insights (Greenwald, 1994).

A study done by Silver (1995) also supported the positive effects of EMDR. Veterans in an inpatient unit completed a pre– and post-treatment self report measure (Problem Rating Form). Thirty-five participants were treated with EMDR, while eighty-three were not.

The EMDR group showed significantly greater improvement on half of the subscales, with a similar trend on the other subscales. This study is strengthened by the fact that participants served as their own controls, the use of a standardized measure, and minimal expectancy effects.

Additionally, this study may be underestimating the effects of EMDR since participants were included regardless of the quantity of EMDR treatments they were given, as some only received one session (Greenwald, 1994).

Not necessarily so, but in comparison to more traditional techniques of treating Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), some reported EMDR results are impressive.

An unpublished study found that five sessions of EMDR were twice as effective in reducing PTSD symptoms compared to adjunctive biofeedback or relaxation training. Other research found EMDR to be about equal to flooding, an exposure technique often used for PTSD, but EMDR had fewer negative side effects (Butler, 1993).

Buttressing these findings, Lipke’s (1993, as cited in Greenwald, 1994) preliminary survey found that only 8% of therapists trained in EMDR reported negative side effects were more frequent with EMDR than with other interventions; the rest of the respondents were about equally divided in reporting that negative side effects were about the same, or less frequent, with EMDR.

Click here for more information regarding EMDR.