Is McKelvey, (2009) correct, are E.M.D.R. and positive psychology really a “dynamic duo”?


Hypothesis: in accordance with McKelvey's (2009)contention, scores from the EMDR group should differ significantly from scores from the discussion group and similarly from the control group for all measures.

Limitations: It is likely that one session of EMDR is insufficient to demonstrate significant differences between the groups. Several further sessions would help in assessing how much more EMDR is required before results reach statistical significance. Sack, Lempa, and Lamprecht (2001) and Maxfield, and Hyer(2002) showed how important is the methodology to assess efficacy of EMDR. This study shows that there is no significant difference between EMDR, and discussion at least in relation to optimism, life satisfaction, and self esteem. It’s nearly the same results in treating PTSD when comparing EMDR and CBT: both therapy methods tend to be equally efficacious (Bisson, et al 2007; Bradley, et al 2005; Davidson, et al. 2001; Seidler & Wagner (2006) ; Van Etten & Taylor,1998) even if EMDR is noticed to be quickest. As Shapiro’s argues it is very important to verify whether intuition can be scientifically demonstrated and is, therefore, valid. In this case, there is no scientific proof that EMDR can significantly improve integration of positive psychology with EMDR, unlike McKelvey contention. However, this is an initial study and it is hoped that future studies will refine the methodology used here.






Martine Regourd-Laizeau
Cyril Tarquinio
Charles Martin-Krumm

Original Work Citation

Regourd-Laizeau, M., Tarquinio, C., & Martin-Krumm, C. (2012, June). Is McKelvey, (2009) correct, are E.M.D.R. and positive psychology really a “dynamic duo”? Poster presented at the 13th EMDR Europe Association Conference, Madrid, Spain



“Is McKelvey, (2009) correct, are E.M.D.R. and positive psychology really a “dynamic duo”?,” Francine Shapiro Library, accessed February 24, 2021,

Output Formats