LogiMind Review of Psychotherapies

Vol. 1 · No. 2 · October 2026 Director of Publication: Édouard Alain de Boysson · Publisher: LogiMind · logimind.org ISSN: pending · Issue DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.21677555 (Zenodo) · Licence: CC BY 4.0

Editorial
FEATURE — EMDR
EMDR and New Technologies
EMDR in the Face of Crises and Disasters
In the spotlight — two practitioners
Box — EMDR in France
An emerging therapy — Integrative Community Therapy
EMDR and its "Daughter Therapies"
Further Reading
The Words of LogiMind

Editorial

Some discoveries arise from chance, and from a gaze that knows how to seize it. In 1987, Francine Shapiro, then a doctoral student in psychology, observed that rhythmic eye movements reduced the emotional charge of distressing thoughts. From this chance walk was born EMDR, a trauma therapy that, in less than four decades, has won recommendations from the WHO, HAS, and NICE. Its efficacy for post-traumatic stress disorder is now firmly established.

Yet EMDR fascinates as much as it divides. Its theoretical model, Adaptive Information Processing (AIP), posits that "frozen" memories are unlocked by bilateral stimulation. But the precise mechanism remains debated: do eye movements act by "taxing working memory," as suggested by the work of Andrade, de Jongh, or van den Hout? The question is unresolved, and media enthusiasm sometimes outstrips scientific caution.

Between fervent adherence and legitimate scepticism, our review chooses rigour. We will yield neither to dogmatic rejection nor to uncritical promotion. EMDR is a powerful tool, but it is not a magic wand. Its eight-phase protocol, its SUD and VOC scales, its humanitarian applications — from the Mexican "butterfly hug" to group protocols — deserve precise, sourced, and embodied analysis.

This is the standard we wish to uphold: to make accessible without betraying complexity. For healing trauma also means respecting the truth of the facts.

FEATURE — EMDR

Key Points — Birth of a Method

The history of EMDR begins with a walk. In 1987, American Francine Shapiro (1948-2019), then a doctoral student in psychology (PhD in 1988), noticed while walking in a park that rapid, spontaneous eye movements reduced the emotional charge of distressing thoughts that came to mind. Intrigued, she experimented on herself, then on volunteers. Two years later, in 1989, she published the first controlled trial in the Journal of Traumatic Stress: the study involved Vietnam veterans and victims of sexual assault. The results showed a dramatic reduction in post-traumatic stress symptoms after a single session. The world of psychotherapy was shaken.

Shapiro then structured her discovery into a method she named EMDR (Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing). In 1990, she founded the EMDR Institute to train clinicians and standardise the protocol. Demand exploded. In 1995, practitioners federated within the EMDR International Association (EMDRIA), which defined certification criteria and oversaw research. Global dissemination accelerated: training was organised in Europe, Latin America, and Asia. The WHO, in its 2013 guidelines, recommended EMDR for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), on a par with trauma-focused cognitive behavioural therapies. In France, the HAS had already validated it in 2007; the UK (NICE) and the US (APA, VA/DoD) issued convergent recommendations.

Yet this rapid clinical success coexists with a stubborn paradox. The underlying theoretical model, Adaptive Information Processing (AIP), posits that traumatic memories remain 'frozen' in the nervous system and that bilateral stimulation enables their reprocessing. But the specific role of eye movements is hotly debated. Researchers (Andrade, de Jongh, van den Hout) advance a competing hypothesis: 'working memory taxation'. This hypothesis is detailed later, in the 'What the science says' section. EMDR heals, but we do not know exactly why. This mystery, far from discrediting it, makes it a still-vibrant object of research.

How It Works — The Eight-Phase Protocol

EMDR (Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing) is based on a precise theoretical model, Adaptive Information Processing (AIP), developed by Francine Shapiro. According to this model, our brain normally has a system for processing experiences that integrates them into adaptive memory networks. But a traumatic event, due to its intensity, can block this process: the memory then remains 'frozen', stored in raw form, with its sensations, emotions, and negative cognitions intact. It has not been digested nor linked to more recent, soothing information. The therapy aims to unblock this processing.

The standard protocol unfolds in eight phases, which are not a simple list of steps but a living process, adjusted to each patient.

Phase 1 (history-taking and treatment planning) identifies the source memories, current triggers, and recurring negative patterns. A hierarchy of targets to be processed is established.

Phase 2 (preparation and stabilisation) is crucial. Before any exposure, the therapist teaches stress management techniques and installs a 'safe place': a mental space of safety (beach, forest, imaginary room) that the patient can access in case of emotional overwhelm. This resource serves as an anchor.

Phase 3 (assessment) involves activating the target memory. The patient chooses an image representing the worst moment, then a negative cognition (e.g., 'I am in danger') and a desired positive cognition (e.g., 'It's over, I am safe'). The current disturbance is then assessed using the SUD scale (Subjective Units of Disturbance, 0 to 10) and the credibility of the positive cognition using the VOC scale (Validity of Cognition, 1 to 7). Finally, the associated body sensation is located.

Phase 4 (desensitisation) is the core of the work. The patient recalls the memory while following bilateral stimulation (guided eye movements, alternating taps on the knees, alternating sounds in the ears). After each set, the therapist asks: 'What comes up now?' Without trying to direct, they allow new associations, images, emotions, or sensations to emerge. Gradually, the disturbing charge decreases (the SUD drops) and the memory transforms.

Phase 5 (installation) strengthens the positive cognition chosen in phase 3. It is linked to the initial memory while continuing bilateral stimulation until the VOC reaches 7 (completely true).

Phase 6 (body scan) invites the patient to mentally scan their body for any residual tension. If discomfort persists, it is treated as a new target.

Phase 7 (closure) ensures a return to a calm state, often via the safe place, and provides instructions for the week.

Phase 8 (re-evaluation) opens the next session by checking the integration of the work and planning the next target.

This protocol, validated by the WHO and HAS for PTSD, transforms a frozen memory into an integrated narrative experience, where the negative cognition gives way to a soothing truth.

What the Science Says

The effectiveness of EMDR in treating post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is now solidly established by several decades of research. Meta-analyses indicate large effect sizes, comparable to those of trauma-focused cognitive behavioural therapies (CBT). This equivalence has led major international bodies to recommend EMDR as a first-line treatment. The World Health Organization (WHO), in its 2013 guidelines, places it alongside trauma-focused CBT. In France, the Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS) validated it as early as 2007. In the UK, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and, in the US, the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Defense (VA/DoD) also include it in their official recommendations.

However, a scientific debate persists, not about overall effectiveness, but about the specific mechanism of action. The central question is: do eye movements provide a unique benefit beyond mere exposure to the traumatic memory? The theoretical model of EMDR, Adaptive Information Processing (AIP), posits that bilateral stimulation allows a poorly integrated memory to be 'unfrozen'. But experimental data struggle to settle the matter.

The most studied hypothesis is that of 'working memory taxation', developed notably by Andrade, van den Hout, and de Jongh. The idea is simple: performing a concurrent task (like following the therapist's finger with one's eyes) while recalling a distressing memory reduces the vividness and emotional charge of that memory, because attentional resources are shared. The memory, less well encoded in working memory, would lose its intensity. Numerous laboratory studies confirm this effect: participants who move their eyes report less vivid and less disturbing memories than those who remain still.

However, results remain mixed. Some clinical studies show no superiority of EMDR with eye movements compared to control conditions where stimulation is replaced by another task (auditory tone, tapping) or by simple exposure. Others, conversely, suggest a specific, albeit modest, effect. The debate is not closed: bilateral stimulation may be only one active ingredient among others, or its effect may depend on precise modalities (rhythm, duration, type of movement). In the current state of knowledge, EMDR remains a validated therapy, but its exact mechanism – between exposure, distraction, and possible neurobiological integration – continues to fuel research.

Limitations, Controversies, and Precautions

While EMDR is validated for PTSD, its application to other disorders remains exploratory. Clinicians use it for phobias, addictions, or complicated grief, with promising but inconsistent results. In phobias, the standard protocol can be adapted by targeting the underlying traumatic memory; several studies report a reduction in avoidance, but superiority over classic exposure is not established. For addictions, the desensitisation of triggers and urges protocol (DeTUR) or targeting trigger memories shows effects on craving intensity, without solid evidence of long-term maintenance. In pathological grief, EMDR helps process intrusive memories related to the loss, but caution is warranted: grief is not a trauma in itself.

Rigorous training is essential. The EMDR Institute and EMDRIA mandate supervised curricula. Phase 2 (stabilisation) is crucial: without solid internal resources (safe place, containment techniques), desensitisation can destabilise the patient. Absolute contraindications are rare, but severe dissociation (dissociative identity disorder) and unstable psychosis require prior adaptations, or even referral to other approaches. Fine-grained assessment of dissociation level (DES, SCID-D) is recommended before any trauma targeting.

Academic criticisms persist. The AIP model, though coherent, is not experimentally validated. Several meta-analyses highlight that EMDR's effect may rest on common factors: the therapeutic alliance, prolonged exposure to the memory, and implicit cognitive restructuring. The question of the specific role of eye movements remains open: the work of Andrade, de Jongh, and van den Hout shows they tax working memory, reducing image vividness, but other bilateral stimulations (taps, sounds) produce similar effects. EMDR is therefore neither a panacea nor a placebo: it is a powerful tool, to be wielded with competence, lucidity, and respect for its limits.

In Brief — EMDR in Ten Points

EMDR (Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing) is a structured psychotherapy developed by Francine Shapiro from 1987, based on bilateral stimulation (most often guided eye movements) to process traumatic memories.
The standard protocol comprises eight phases: history-taking, preparation (including installation of a 'safe place'), assessment (with SUD and VOC scales), desensitisation, installation of positive cognition, body scan, closure, and re-evaluation.
Bilateral stimulation alternates sets of eye movements, taps, or sounds from one ear to the other, while inviting the patient to focus on the disturbing memory.
The underlying theoretical model, Adaptive Information Processing (AIP), posits that an unprocessed traumatic memory remains 'frozen' in the nervous system, and that bilateral stimulation allows its resumption of adaptive processing.
EMDR is recognised as a treatment of choice for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) by the World Health Organization (2013), the French Haute Autorité de Santé (2007), the UK's NICE, and the American APA.
Several meta-analyses confirm its efficacy for PTSD, with effect sizes comparable to those of trauma-focused cognitive behavioural therapies.
The precise mechanism of action remains debated: the dominant hypothesis (Andrade, de Jongh, van den Hout) suggests that eye movements tax working memory, reducing the vividness and emotional charge of the recalled memory.
Absolute contraindications are rare, but particular caution is required in cases of severe dissociative disorder, active psychosis, photosensitive epilepsy, or acute ocular pathology.
Training in EMDR is regulated by the EMDR International Association (EMDRIA, founded in 1995) and EMDR Europe, and includes a theoretical component, supervised practice, and personal sessions.
Adapted protocols exist for indications other than PTSD: phobias, complicated grief, chronic pain, and group humanitarian interventions (EMDR-IGTP protocol, 'butterfly hug').

EMDR and New Technologies

Bilateral stimulation, the cornerstone of the EMDR protocol, relies on a variety of devices. Light bars (alternating points of light), tactile buzzers (vibrations held in each hand), and audio headsets (alternating sounds) are the most common. The choice depends on the patient's sensitivity: some prefer tactile, others visual, particularly in cases of hyperacusis.

For about fifteen years, so-called "EMDR light" mobile applications have offered an animated cursor on the screen. While they can serve as an adjunct for a patient who is already stabilised, they present a major risk: the reactivation of a traumatic memory without the presence of a therapist to contain the distress. Several clinicians report cases of retraumatisation, where the user, alone in front of the screen, is overwhelmed by flashbacks or dissociative crises. These tools in no way replace the preparation and closure phases ensured by the practitioner.

Virtual reality (VR) remains experimental. A few prototypes integrate immersive visual stimuli (alternating luminous spheres in a 3D environment) to potentiate desensitisation. The data are still too limited to evaluate their specific efficacy.

The Covid-19 pandemic accelerated EMDR teleconsultation. Lacking buzzers, therapists use a cursor moving across the screen, which the patient follows with their eyes. While this adaptation allows care to continue, it has clear limitations: absence of tactile stimulation, difficulty in detecting micro-dissociative signs (blank stare, slowing down), and the impossibility of physically intervening in the event of a crisis. Patients with a severe dissociative tendency are particularly vulnerable to this.

In conclusion, these devices – applications, VR, teleconsultation – are possible adjuncts, never a substitute for the therapeutic relationship. It is the embodied presence of the clinician, their ability to adjust the pace and contain the emotion, that constitutes the specificity and safety of the EMDR process.

EMDR in the Face of Crises and Disasters

When war, an earthquake, or a forest fire strikes entire populations, the psychotherapist's office becomes an inaccessible luxury. EMDR, born in the one-to-one setting, had to invent formats capable of responding to the scale of the disaster. Two Mexican innovations, born of urgency, illustrate this adaptation.

The "Butterfly Hug": A Self-Stimulation Born from a Hurricane

In October 1997, Hurricane Pauline devastated Acapulco. Hundreds of traumatised children, with no access to individual care. Psychologists Lucina Artigas and Ignacio Jarero, faced with this mass distress, improvised a technique of bilateral self-stimulation: the butterfly hug (abrazo de la mariposa). The patient crosses their arms over their chest, hands under the collarbones, fingers spread. They tap alternately with both hands, like the wings of a butterfly, while evoking the disturbing memory. Simple, non-intrusive, this self-administration allows children, even very young or with low literacy, in a group, to participate in a desensitisation process without an individual therapist.

The EMDR-IGTP Group Protocol

From this observation was born the Integrative Group Treatment Protocol (EMDR-IGTP). It combines the butterfly hug with a graphic support: participants draw their traumatic memory, note their level of distress (SUD), then perform series of bilateral stimulations in a group, guided by a facilitator. The protocol alternates phases of drawing, stimulation, and minimal verbal sharing. It allows for the simultaneous treatment of dozens of people, even those who are illiterate, in one to three sessions.

The Trauma Recovery / EMDR HAP Humanitarian Network

Founded by Francine Shapiro herself, the Trauma Recovery network (formerly EMDR Humanitarian Assistance Programs) deploys training and post-disaster interventions worldwide: after the 2004 tsunami in Southeast Asia, the earthquakes in Haiti (2010) and Nepal (2015), or with Syrian refugees. The goal is to train local responders – psychologists, social workers, teachers – in group protocols, in order to create a sustainable response capacity.

Strengths and Limitations of Mass EMDR

Strengths: The brevity (a few sessions), collective administration, and self-stimulation (butterfly hug) make it a valuable frontline tool. It requires neither expensive equipment nor electricity, and can be integrated into medical tents or schools.

Limitations: Training local responders remains a challenge: a poorly supervised group protocol can reactivate traumas without resolving them. Complex traumas (repeated violence, prolonged exile) respond less well to these short formats. The logistics (gathering dispersed populations, ensuring confidentiality) are heavy. Above all, long-term follow-up is poorly documented: what becomes of these patients months later? Finally, group EMDR does not replace either psychological first aid (safety, calm, social connection) or a comprehensive psychosocial system including shelter, food, and protection. It is one link in the chain, effective but not sufficient.

In the spotlight — two practitioners

Lucina Artigas & Ignacio Jarero (Mexico)

In Mexico, Lucina Artigas and Ignacio Jarero form a duo whose work has spread far beyond national borders. They have made their country a laboratory and a home for humanitarian group EMDR, in response to natural disasters and the violence that strikes entire populations. Their collaboration, nourished by decades of fieldwork, has produced protocols now used on every continent.

Lucina Artigas is the creator of the "butterfly hug", a bilateral self-stimulation of crossed arms that patients can practise alone, without equipment. This simple gesture, born from clinical observation, has become a universal stabilisation tool. With Jarero, she co-designed the EMDR-IGTP (Integrative Group Treatment Protocol), which allows entire groups of survivors to be treated simultaneously. A tireless trainer, she has devoted her career to transmitting these techniques to humanitarian clinicians, from Mexico to conflict zones.

Ignacio Jarero, researcher and clinician, has founded several Mexican and Latin American organisations dedicated to crisis intervention and trauma research. He has developed and disseminated protocols adapted to recent traumatic events, including the IGTP, and has trained hundreds of practitioners in many countries. His fieldwork, notably after Hurricane Pauline in 1997, helped document the value of group EMDR in disaster contexts.

Together, they have shown that EMDR can be adapted to the cultural realities and logistical constraints of emerging countries. The challenge today is to train local supervisors capable of sustainably embedding these practices, without depending on foreign experts.

Box — EMDR in France

In France, EMDR obtained official status in 2007, when the Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS) recommended it for the treatment of PTSD, alongside trauma-focused cognitive-behavioural therapies. This recognition paved the way for professional structuring. The association EMDR France, created in the early 2000s, oversees certified training reserved for psychiatrists, psychologists and psychotherapists. The training pathway comprises several levels (basic, advanced, supervisor) and requires regular clinical supervision, ensuring the rigour of the eight-phase protocol.

The network of practitioners has expanded, but remains unevenly distributed: dense in metropolitan areas (Paris, Lyon, Marseille), it is sparser in rural regions. The use of EMDR is cautiously extending beyond PTSD: traumatic grief, specific phobias, or anxiety disorders, although these indications do not yet benefit from as broad a consensus as for trauma. French practice, regulated and demanding, illustrates the measured integration of a therapy born across the Atlantic.

An emerging therapy — Integrative Community Therapy

Born in Fortaleza (Brazil) in the 1980s under the impetus of psychiatrist and anthropologist Adalberto Barreto, Integrative Community Therapy (ICT) is a collective care practice rooted in Paulo Freire's pedagogy of conscientisation. Its structure is simple: open talking circles, where each person is invited to share a suffering, a difficulty of daily life. But the strength of the model lies in valuing experiential knowledge: the group, not an expert, becomes the therapeutic resource. Participants respond by sharing their own survival strategies, their "community remedies." The therapist-facilitator does not prescribe; they facilitate the circulation of speech and mutual recognition.

This approach is particularly relevant for trauma. Post-traumatic stress states are often accompanied by profound isolation and paralysing shame, which prevent putting experiences into words and seeking help. ICT acts as a counter-fire: by restoring the sense of belonging and dignity, it breaks the solitude. Seeing one's story recognised by others, and discovering that one's own experience can help another, reactivates the circuits of attachment and relational safety that trauma has damaged.

Its limitations are those of its strength: a low-cost tool, easy to deploy in contexts of deprivation or disaster, ICT is not an individual trauma therapy. It does not directly address intrusive memories or flashbacks. It constitutes a valuable complement, a first level of psychosocial care. Its spread in Europe remains modest, but training exists, notably in Portugal and France, where it is beginning to be used in community psychiatry services and migrant aid organisations.

EMDR and its "Daughter Therapies"

The rise of EMDR has prompted clinical developments that adopt some of its principles, or pursue similar objectives without being derived from it.

Direct derivatives: Brainspotting and variants. David Grand, a practitioner trained in EMDR, developed Brainspotting around 2003. The technique involves guiding the patient toward a point in their visual field that seems to "resonate" with the distress linked to the traumatic memory, then maintaining a fixed gaze during reprocessing. The hypothesis is that a specific eye position would activate brain circuits involved in emotional memory. Other variants, closer to the standard protocol, use bilateral tapping (alternating tactile stimulation on the hands or knees) or alternating left-right sounds, in place of eye movements. These adaptations retain the phase structure and the AIP model, but modify the mode of bilateral stimulation.

Parallel approaches: Somatic Experiencing and Narrative Exposure Therapy. Peter Levine developed Somatic Experiencing, which focuses on the residual bodily sensations of trauma, without using bilateral stimulation. The idea is to "discharge" the energy blocked in the nervous system through a graded attention to somatic manifestations. Narrative Exposure Therapy (NET), for its part, involves reconstructing the person's life story by integrating traumatic events, within a safe framework. These two approaches share with EMDR the goal of reprocessing traumatic memory, but they do not derive from its protocol and do not use the AIP model as a theoretical foundation.

A necessary clarification. The AIP (Adaptive Information Processing) model is a theoretical model, not a therapy. It explains why a poorly integrated memory remains "frozen" and a source of suffering. EMDR is a therapy that relies on this model, but other approaches can pursue the same goal without using it.

The Words of LogiMind

Lexicon of the Month

Bilateral alternating stimulation — alternate stimulation of both hemispheres (eye movements, tapping, sounds) at the core of the EMDR protocol.
Adaptive information processing — theoretical model (AIP) according to which a "poorly stored" memory can be reintegrated in a peaceful manner.
Desensitisation — progressive reduction of the emotional charge associated with a targeted memory (measured by the SUD scale).
Abreaction — intense emotional discharge that may occur during the reprocessing of a traumatic memory.

Neologisms of the Month

Each month, the journal presents three neologisms from the LogiMind Dictionary of 395 Therapeutic Neologisms (Édouard Alain de Boysson, LogiMind — ISBN 9798285281467, also deposited on HAL). Selection of the month, echoing EMDR and trauma:

Ephemotrace (no. 306) — psychic trace left by a very brief but striking emotional event, often not integrated into narrative memory. It is precisely this undigested sensory memory that EMDR seeks to reprocess.
Chronodistortion (no. 301) — subjective alteration of time perception, frequent in post-traumatic stress disorder where time seems "stuck on the event". EMDR aims to make the memory finally past.
Futurescreen (no. 302) — unconscious symbolic limit beyond which the patient can no longer project themselves into the future, often linked to trauma. Direct echo of the "future script" phase of EMDR.

Colophon

LogiMind Review of Psychotherapies — Vol. 1, No. 2 (October 2026). Director of Publication: Édouard Alain de Boysson. Publisher: LogiMind (registered trademark). Contact: contact@logimind.org. Open access under Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 licence. ISSN: pending. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.21677555.

How to cite this issue

@article{boysson2026revue_emdr,
  author  = {de Boysson, Édouard Alain},
  title   = {L'EMDR},
  journal = {Revue LogiMind des psychothérapies},
  volume  = {1}, number = {2}, year = {2026},
  doi     = {10.5281/zenodo.21677555},
  issn    = {en attente},
  url     = {https://logimind.org}
}