Letter to the Editor

Here is a Letter to the Editor I wrote that will be appearing in the March/April issue of the Psychotherapy Networker magazine (this is the full, uncut version).  It was in response to an article on Energy Psychology.

Letter to the Editor, Psychotherapy Networker

February 1, 2005

The Plural of Anecdote is Not Data

I was disappointed to read in your January/February 2005 issue that TFT and "energy psychology" are still being promoted in the form of anecdotal reports.  David Feinstein gave success stories from public demonstrations, without noting the possible pitfalls of such demonstrations, such as the production of social compliance and demand characteristics.  However, I was also disappointed in the skeptical response.  Efran made the same error as Feinstein by dismissing the practicality of using data from controlled studies in clinical practice, and then giving his own anecdotes that TFT and certain other controversial therapies had not worked for him.  In their efforts to downplay the usefulness of research in clinical practice, what both Efran and Feinstein missed was a study that was published by Waite and Holder (2003) that could be informative to practicing clinicians.  This study showed that that there was no statistically significant difference between tapping on meridian points, tapping on sham points, and tapping on an inanimate object (a doll).  All three groups did better than a no-treatment control group, but the changes were minimal and no one in the sample of was cured of their phobia, as is reported in the anecdotes by proponents.  Moreover, energy psychology is in no way comparable to Dialectical Behavioral Therapy, which has been in existence for less than half the time TFT has and does have some studies to support its efficacy.  Both Efran and Feinstein seem to be implying that these approaches are new.  Quite the contrary, it has been 25 years since Roger Callahan's first TFT "case" and empirical support, after all this time is still scant.  When, in 2001, TFT proponents were given the unprecedented opportunity to publish studies in a major journal without peer review, they presented uncontrolled case reports that the critics rightfully deemed uninterpretable.  It became evident that such studies would not have passed peer review, not because of bias, but rather, because of their major flaws.  Some of Callahan's techniques suffers from the additional disadvantage of being shrouded in trade secrecy, making them impossible to replicate by those with no vested interest.  Additionally, Feinstein's argument that seasoned therapists are getting good results with energy psychology is unconvincing because what the evidence shows is that many clinicians fail to learn from experience (Garb & Boyle, 2003).  Having been trained in TFT at its most advanced level, the Voice Technology, it has been my observation that practitioners tend to focus on successes in their promotions of these methods and explain away failures.  That is why there is no substitute for good studies.  If the proponents of energy psychology want credibility within the scientific community, they need to do their homework in the form of well-designed, controlled studies.  Making excuses for this being a long and complicated process after all the years these techniques have been in existence, simply does not cut it.  There has been plenty of time to do research.  It is time for respectable professional publications such as yours to stop printing anecdotes and start asking for reviews of actual evidence.  After 25 years, it is time to stop making excuses for not having conducted proper studies and to get on with the business of doing so.

References:

Garb, H.N. &  Boyle, P.A. (2003). Understanding why come clinicians use pseudoscientific methods: findings from research on clinical judgment. In Lilienfeld, S.O., Lynn, S. J. & Lohr, J.M. (eds). Science and Pseudoscience in Clnical Psychology, New York: Guilford Press.

Waite, W.L. & Holder, M.D. (2003). Assessment of the Emotional Freedom Technique: an alternative treatment for fear. Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice, 2(2), 20-26.

Monica Pignotti, MSW