Does treating emotional memories come at a price? Effects of single-session EMDR, imaginal exposure, and imagery rescripting on forced-choice recognition of event details in healthy adults – a laboratory study

Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), Imaginal Exposure (IE), and Imagery Rescripting (ImRs) are effective trauma-focused interventions. However, concerns persist that they may impair the accuracy of memories addressed in treatment. This laboratory study tested whether a single sessi...

Celý popis

Uložené v:
Podrobná bibliografia
Vydané v:Behaviour research and therapy Ročník 195; s. 104884
Hlavní autori: Aleksic, Milena, Ehring, Thomas, Kunze, Anna, Wolkenstein, Larissa
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:English
Vydavateľské údaje: England Elsevier Ltd 01.12.2025
Predmet:
Adult
Choice Behavior
EMDR
Emotions - physiology
Eye Movement Desensitization Reprocessing - methods
False memory
Female
Humans
Imagery rescripting
Imagery, Psychotherapy - methods
Imaginal exposure
Implosive Therapy - methods
Male
Mental Recall
Post-traumatic stress disorder
Recognition, Psychology - physiology
Stress, Psychological - psychology
Stress, Psychological - therapy
Young Adult
Imagery rescripting
False memory
EMDR
Post-traumatic stress disorder
Imaginal exposure
ISSN:0005-7967, 1873-622X, 1873-622X
On-line prístup:Získať plný text
Tagy: Pridať tag
Žiadne tagy, Buďte prvý, kto otaguje tento záznam!
Popis
Shrnutí:Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), Imaginal Exposure (IE), and Imagery Rescripting (ImRs) are effective trauma-focused interventions. However, concerns persist that they may impair the accuracy of memories addressed in treatment. This laboratory study tested whether a single session of EMDR, IE, or ImRs affects forced-choice recognition in healthy adults. Two hundred sixty-five participants underwent the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) and received EMDR, IE, ImRs, or no intervention (NIC) the following day. One week later, memory for the TSST was assessed using a forced-choice recognition task (one target; three plausible foils). Contrary to expectations, the interventions did not differentially affect recognition performance; the number of correct answers was comparable to NIC across intervention groups. For ImRs and IE, this aligns with recent findings suggesting that they do not impair recognition memory. For EMDR, prior experimental studies linked eye movements to poorer delayed free recall, stimulus discrimination, and yes/no recognition. Here, we observed no impairment in delayed forced-choice recognition, suggesting that previously reported negative effects may not generalize across memory outcomes or task formats. Overall, these findings indicate that trauma-focused interventions do not carry a general risk of memory impairment. However, conclusions are limited by the laboratory analogue design, exclusive reliance on a recognition task, and the absence of treatment-integrity checks, which raises the possibility that null effects reflect limited intervention effectiveness. Future research should specify conditions under which these interventions may pose risks, clarify mechanisms underlying task- and memory-specific effects, and examine how findings generalize to clinical populations. •This study examined if trauma-focused interventions reduce memory accuracy.•We compared the effects of ImRs, EMDR and IE on induced aversive memories.•None of the interventions impaired memory accuracy compared to no intervention.•Our findings challenge concerns about memory-distorting intervention effects.•Future research should replicate findings for clinical autobiographical memories.
Bibliografia:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0005-7967
1873-622X
1873-622X
DOI:10.1016/j.brat.2025.104884