This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Rubin, A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Fallacies and Deflections in Debating the Empirical Support for EMDR in the Treatment of PTSD: A Reply to Maxfield, Lake, & Hyer

University of Texas at Austin, School of Social Work, Austin, TX 78712, arubin{at}mail.utexas.edu

The Maxfield, Lake, and Hyer acerbic attack on my review is filled with fallacies and inaccurate and unwarranted accusations that deflect attention away from the main issue pertaining to the insufficient evidence base for current claims that EMDR is more effective than exposure therapies and is an empirically-supported treatment for children, combat PTSD, and multiple trauma PTSD. More research is needed before such claims can be called evidence-based.

Key Words: EMDR • exposure therapy • PTSD

Traumatology, Vol. 10, No. 2, 91-105 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/153476560401000203


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. R. Figley Editorial Note Traumatology, March 1, 2006; 12(1): 1 - 7. [PDF]