Littel Marianne, van Schie Kevin, van den Hout Marcel A
Institute of Psychology, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Department of Clinical Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2017 Jun 19;8(sup1):1328954. doi: 10.1080/20008198.2017.1328954. eCollection 2017.
: Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) is an effective psychological treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder. Recalling a memory while simultaneously making eye movements (EM) decreases a memory's vividness and/or emotionality. It has been argued that non-specific factors, such as treatment expectancy and experimental demand, may contribute to the EMDR's effectiveness. : The present study was designed to test whether expectations about the working mechanism of EMDR would alter the memory attenuating effects of EM. Two experiments were conducted. In Experiment 1, we examined the effects of pre-existing (non-manipulated) knowledge of EMDR in participants with and without prior knowledge. In Experiment 2, we experimentally manipulated prior knowledge by providing participants without prior knowledge with correct or incorrect information about EMDR's working mechanism. : Participants in both experiments recalled two aversive, autobiographical memories during brief sets of EM (Recall+EM) or keeping eyes stationary (Recall Only). Before and after the intervention, participants scored their memories on vividness and emotionality. A Bayesian approach was used to compare two competing hypotheses on the effects of (existing/given) prior knowledge: (1) Prior (correct) knowledge increases the effects of Recall+EM vs. Recall Only, vs. (2) prior knowledge does not affect the effects of Recall+EM. : Recall+EM caused greater reductions in memory vividness and emotionality than Recall Only in all groups, including the incorrect information group. In Experiment 1, both hypotheses were supported by the data: prior knowledge boosted the effects of EM, but only modestly. In Experiment 2, the second hypothesis was clearly supported over the first: providing knowledge of the underlying mechanism of EMDR did not alter the effects of EM. : Recall+EM appears to be quite robust against the effects of prior expectations. As Recall+EM is the core component of EMDR, expectancy effects probably contribute little to the effectiveness of EMDR treatment.
眼动脱敏再处理疗法（EMDR）是治疗创伤后应激障碍的一种有效心理疗法。在进行眼动（EM）的同时回忆一段记忆，会降低该记忆的生动程度和/或情感强度。有人认为，诸如治疗期望和实验要求等非特异性因素可能有助于EMDR疗法产生疗效。
本研究旨在测试对EMDR作用机制的期望是否会改变眼动对记忆的减弱效果。为此进行了两项实验。在实验1中，我们考察了有或没有EMDR相关先验知识的参与者，其预先存在（未操控）的EMDR知识所产生的影响。在实验2中，我们通过向没有先验知识的参与者提供关于EMDR作用机制的正确或错误信息，来操控他们的先验知识。
两项实验的参与者在进行简短的眼动组（回忆 + 眼动）或保持眼睛静止（仅回忆）过程中，回忆两段痛苦的、关于自身经历的记忆。在干预前后，参与者对其记忆的生动程度和情感强度进行评分。采用贝叶斯方法比较关于（既有/给定的）先验知识影响的两种相互竞争的假设：（1）先验（正确）知识增强回忆 + 眼动组相对于仅回忆组的效果，与（2）先验知识不影响回忆 + 眼动组相比。
在所有组中，包括错误信息组，回忆 + 眼动组比仅回忆组导致记忆的生动程度和情感强度有更大程度的降低。在实验1中，两项假设均得到数据支持：先验知识增强了眼动的效果，但增幅不大。在实验2中，第二个假设明显比第一个得到更多支持：提供EMDR潜在机制的知识并没有改变眼动的效果。
回忆 + 眼动似乎对先验期望的影响具有很强的抵抗力。由于回忆 + 眼动是EMDR的核心组成部分，期望效应可能对EMDR治疗效果的贡献不大。
