On science, orthodoxy, EMDR, and the AIP, H. Lipke, Response from the editor

Description

The Journal ’s instructions to authors are located inside the back cover of every issue. The relevant passage stated, “Articles that recommend a clinical approach that differs from EMDR’s standard protocol or its foundational Adaptive Information Processing model (Shapiro, 2001) should explain these differences.”The purpose of this instruction was to encourage clarity rather than conformity. It is important for Journal readers, some of whom have not been trained in this method, to know whether the techniques described are standard for eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) or variations on the protocol. For example, the reader of an article describing a technique that combines EMDR with aspects of another psychotherapy approach such as hypnosis could assume that hypnotic inductions were part of standard EMDR unless it was stated clearly which elements were adapted from that method. The request that authors also clarify points of divergence from the adaptive information-processing (AIP) model was similarly intended to generate clarity. It is consistent with the recognition that a common platform for discussion is needed, even if that platform is imperfect. It is also consistent with Shapiro’s teaching of the AIP model as a clinical heuristic that is subject to revision in the face of new data or more compelling models. Rather than thwarting discussion, the request that authors explain points of disagreement was designed to promote deeper consideration of the mechanisms and models underlying EMDR. In response to Dr. Lipke’s letter, the Journal ’s Editorial Board engaged in a thorough review process to examine the value of this instruction and invited responses (see letters above) from Dr. Shapiro and the EMDRIA’s Board of Directors to further illuminate the process. The Editorial Board has a diverse membership, and there were divergent opinions, including some disagreements with the following response. It was decided to modify the identified statement so that it now reads, “Articles that recommend a clinical approach that differs from EMDR’s standard protocol or Shapiro’s (2001) Adaptive Information Processing model should discuss these differences.”

Format

Journal

Language

English

Author(s)

Louise Maxfield

Original Work Citation

Maxfield, L. (2009). On science, orthodoxy, EMDR, and the AIP, H. Lipke, Response from the editor. Journal of EMDR Practice and Research, 3(2), 109-112. doi:10.1891/1933-3196.3.2.109

Collection

Citation

“On science, orthodoxy, EMDR, and the AIP, H. Lipke, Response from the editor,” Francine Shapiro Library, accessed October 24, 2020, https://emdria.omeka.net/items/show/21056.

Output Formats