EMDR Frequently Asked Questions
This section was developed in response to participants’ questions specific to PESI’s training, EMDR: the Complete Overview
(Not an EMDRIA-Affiliated Course)
Question: I am considering signing up for your EMDR Course and have a question: After this seminar, am I ethically authorized to use EMDR in therapy with my patients or is further training and certification required? If your seminar teaches the essential points of EMDR and we are allowed to use it in therapy settings afterwards, that would be wonderful
- Regarding Certification: Certification in EMDR is-to say the least- misunderstood. Certification is offered by the member organization EMDRIA; it is completely voluntary; and according to EMDRIA’s executive director, only about 5% of all those trained in EMDR go on to become certified (personal communication, 2009). (*See below for EMDRIA’s requirements for certification). For further questions regarding EMDRIA and this question, see section below: Questions from EMDRIA Consultant, Jamie Marich, PhD
- Regarding being “ethically authorized” to use EMDR in therapy: EMDR is an efficient and effective tool for treating clients who have had traumatic experiences and continue to suffer from the aftereffects. Although touted as a complete, complex psychotherapy in and of itself, this particular training treats EMDR as a modality, i.e. one of many trauma processing modalities to be added to the skilled clinician’s repertoire. Using EMDR for trauma processing requires that the competent clinician learn, practice and implement this modality into his/her current clinical population and setting. Training and practice are essential; certification is not.
*EMDRIA Certification Requirements (from EMDR International Association’s website)
1) EMDRIA Approved Training: Submit evidence of having completed an EMDRIA approved Basic EMDR Training program. A copy of your certificate of completion is required.
2) License/Certification: Show evidence of a license/certification/registration as a mental health professional. A photocopy of your license/certification/registration to practice independently is required.
3) Do you have at least two years experience in your field of license/ certification/ registration? Answer yes or no on the application form and then attach notarized documentation supporting this statement. You can write out the statement as it is written, "I have at least two years' experience in my field of license", or something similar and then have it notarized.
4) Have you conducted at least 50 EMDR sessions with no less than 25 clients? Answer yes or no on the application form and then attach notarized documentation supporting this statement. Again, you can write out the statement as it is written, "I have conducted at least 50 EMDR sessions with no less than 25 clients", or something similar and then have it notarized. You may combine statements #3 and #4 on one sheet of paper and have the document notarized once for your convenience.
5) *Have you received 20 hours of consultation by an Approved Consultant in EMDR? Answer yes or no on the application form. Then you will need to obtain documentation from the Approved Consultant(s) you received your consultation from, verifying the number of hours you have received from him/her and how many of those hours were individual consultation and how many were group consultation. If you have received consultation from more than one Approved Consultant, you will need documentation from each. At least 10 of these hours must be obtained through individual, EMDR-focused consultation. (Provisions will be made for those therapists who practice in isolated areas and lack the convenient proximity to an Approved Consultant). The remaining 10 hours may be obtained through small group consultation. Groups that meet for consultation cannot exceed more than 8 participants at a time.*Only consultation hours received AFTER completion of an EMDRIA Approved Basic Training program can be applied towards this requirement.
6) Attach letter or letter(s) of recommendation from one or more Approved Consultant(s) in EMDR, regarding your utilization of EMDR while in the consulting relationship.
7) Attach two letters of recommendation regarding your professional utilization of EMDR in practice, ethics in practice, and professional character. These can be obtained from colleagues or peers.
8) Attach certificates of completion of 12 hours of EMDRIA Credits (continuing education in EMDR). The Basic EMDR Training is not awarded EMDRIA Credits - only EMDRIA Approved Credit Programs in EMDR that are completed after the basic training can receive EMDRIA Credits and be used towards this application requirement.”
Question About Products: Would you kindly remind the name of your book? Can I get it on Amazon?
Answer: The book is TRAUMA COMPETENCY: A CLINICIAN'S GUIDE Sometimes you can get it on Amazon, but lately it’s price seems to be extremely inflated! Please do not ever pay more then the cover price because you may always get it through PESI.
Question: What is the difference between your CD (the one on your website) and PESI’s DVD’s (looks like they’re on your website and PESI’’s)?
Answer: The "CD": EMDR Essentials is the CD that was available @ the seminar. This CD download is the only product that sold by my company, Integrative Trauma Treatment, LLC, the others are PESI products- (starring me :)- but distributed by PESI. You may obtain the CD, EMDR Essentials easily from the website as a digital download-meaning you download all the files (which contain all the forms listed below) and then they're yours forever; once you've downloaded them, feel free to print them out and distribute them to whomever you like.
My recommendation is to fill it out regardless of whether you intend to consult with me or not; it will be helpful in clarifying what you want/need. In addition, in conceptualizing case(s) and developing more precise questions you may just answer your own questions and/or you may come up with additional questions.
Question: Initial installations are showing large positive gains for my trauma clients. I did discuss with you (and have read in the training manual) using the installation process as a stand alone treatment protocol for affect regulation and distress tolerance. My Client of over 2 years is experiencing a sense of mastery unknown to her before...so yes...I am developing an even stronger interest in "multi-sensory" trauma work. I have read over the manual about 6 times now...so if you want a recital just ask!) in keeping in mind that the "processing" is a late-stage intervention is there any inherent risk in beginning installation earlier on in treatment for trauma clients? ( I suspect this would be beneficial and low risk for the following reasons)
- Positive resource installation can provide immediate relief for painful affect states and distress (experienced by so many of my Clients throughout treatment)
- Resource installation benefits experienced by the Client can foster a stronger sense of trust in the therapist and hope for recovery early on in treatment.
- Resource installation and "utilization" by Clients earlier on in therapy, can strengthen these coping skills, reinforce their efficacy for behavior/emotion management and arguably be more accessible and "stronger" if and when trauma processing is approached as a later stage intervention. Your thoughts?!
Answer: Of your statements above, we are in agreement.
Question: The internal support offered by installation (by the way I am finding that applying the ABS for every experienced sense "sight, sound smell, taste, touch, body sensations, emotions and anchor word) AS LONG AS THE SENSATION AND CORRESPONDING AFFECT IS COMPLETELY POSITIVE during installation is even more effective than experiencing these sensations sequentially, "holding them" and then applying ABS as originally instructed. Again, I feel this type of experimentation is safe and ethical because we are working with positive resources and not processing traumatic material. I also find that repeated positive ABS and corresponding "checking in" ensures a greater sense of prevention from any unwanted contamination during the installation process.
The installations themselves are so vital for my current clients (lower income DV client's with complex trauma histories) because the options for external support (typically abusive or non-approving families, limited "friends who don’t use" and sometimes horridly run support groups rife with re-traumatization opportunities etc) really makes the internal resourcing all the more valuable. I had one CPTSD/DV Client who recently had a severe automobile accident describe the installation as "better than morphine" Of course...I informed her that this new resource was in no way shape or form a substitute for Rx and 'Doctor's Orders' :) My questions to you are these:
- What is the next training I should attend?
- Is there an additional EMDR training that would be beneficial?
- Or should I just stick to recommended readings (I know you strongly recommended Parnell) to reinforce the basics.
Answer: I'm happy to hear your enthusiasm! For resourcing: Parnell's, "Tapping In" is a Must Read read. Get it! :) Tapping In: A Step-by-Step Guide to Activating Your Healing Resources Through Bilateral Stimulation... And for everything else: Parnell's, A Therapist's Guide to EMDR: Tools and Techniques for Successful Treatment
Question: Regarding frequency and intensity...is it best to use the same "strength" of vibration with "installation" as we would use for pending reprocessing?
Answer: Intensity and frequency are client's choice for resourcing (you need not change either one during resourcing, as the Theratapper is on only 5-10 secs). Reprocessing-same thing for intensity client's choice, but frequency you will be altering constantly.
Question: I have gotten the Theratapper out and been playing with it and have read through the manual a few times now and nowhere in there can I find what I remember which is that we were regularly turning the pulse rate knob as we were doing the rounds of abs (alternating bilateral stimulation...right?) Am I remembering wrong?? Aren't we supposed to be doing that -- varying the pulse rate so that the brain can not attenuate to it?
Answer: Essentially, we vary the rate of the tactile stimulation so that the brain-that fantastic organ of pattern detection and prediction- is forced to keep orienting toward this novel stimulus (the buzzing in the hands). The brain is forced to keep paying attention (consciously or unconsciously) to novel stimuli. If we leave the rate alone (i.e. forget to continuously turn the rate dial) the brain quickly picks up its simple pattern, i.e. the pattern of buzz...buz ...buzz.....buzz.....buzz.....buzz.....buzz.....buzz.....buzz.....buzz..... buzz.....buzz.....etc. becomes quite predictable; once predictable, there is no reason to-consciously or unconsciously- pay attention to it. Why orient toward or attend to something so mundane? Since the buzzing (the stimulus) is neither new, dangerous nor interesting, the brain is once again free to attend exclusively to the traumatic memory. However, if we continuously vary the rate, the pattern of: buzz............buzz...buzz.....buzz.............buzz....buzz..........buzz....buzz...buzz.. (you get the picture) is not so predictable, thereby insisting that the brain keep orienting toward the stimulus and keep trying to predict a pattern. It will fail, but that’s the point; it must keep paying attention to the tactile stimulus (which, notably, is in the here and now). The brain tries to figure out this "dis-tracting"stimulus’ pattern, while simultaneously attending to the traumatic memory (which, notably, is in the there and then), the memory is unable to gain “traction”, allowing the brain to be changed.
Question: I am seeing a 20-year-old female, with a history of fibromyalgia and seizures...docs have told her that these are both epileptic and non-epileptic however cat scans do not show any abnormalities...one doc called them 'startle seizures' another says they are her being dramatic ... wonder if they are psychogenic and trauma related but the client reports no real traumas prior to seizures (onset at 15yo)...my question is...should I avoid EMDR with this young woman because of the seizures?
Answer: Addressing your immediate concern, my answer is: not necessarily. As her clinician, you need to contact her neurologist sign off on it, i.e. say it's okay with him/her. It's not just a cover your ass move, it may well be a helpful consult not only to get information from him/her but an opportunity and to educate him/her about trauma and its sequel. Again, if (s)he doesn't know what EMDR is, I’d recommend looking for a new neurologist :) You may want some references from physicians (just saying) to pass on regarding traumatic stress and subsequent health issues. For that I will refer you to the leading authorities:
The two articles listed below are from: the ACE Study website (This is an extremely helpful study linking adverse childhood experience to poor health in adulthood. The two articles below do are helpful, but please visit the site as well)
- Anda RF, Felitti VJ, Walker J, Whitfield, CL, Bremner JD, Perry BD, Dube SR, Giles WH. The enduring effects of abuse and related adverse experiences in childhood: a convergence of evidence from neurobiology and epidemiology. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences 2006; 56(3):174–86
- Corso, PS, Edwards, VJ, Fang, X, Mercy, JA. Health-related quality of life among adults who experienced maltreatment during childhood. Am J Public Health 2008;98:1094–110
Two of my favorite books for clinicians regarding stress, trauma and disease:
Bob Scaer's book, The Trauma Spectrum: Hidden Wounds and Human Resiliency. The book is a must read for anyone working in the field of traumatic stress. (Scaer specifically touches on seizures, kindling, etc.)
- Peter Levine’s In an Unspoken Voice: How the Body Releases Trauma and Restores Goodness
Question: I’m going over the notes I took, and you mentioned that the CBS Farmer’s Market Tragedy was on your website, but I’m not finding it. I would really like to have this particular broadcast to show to my superiors as a means of informing them of the treatment in order to get their blessings on my using your techniques and the thera-tapper.
Answer: Here is the URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBtqWrs2-K0
Questions from EMDRIA Consultant, Jamie Marich, Ph.D.
~Excerpted from the article, The Importance of Investigation Prior to Contempt: An Interview with Linda Curran, PESI Training Developer
To say that Linda Curran is a controversial figure amongst EMDRIA members is an understatement. Curran is responsible for developing the two-day training in EMDR and EMDR-Related Techniques offered by PESI, LLC, a continuing education company based in Eau Claire, Wisconsin. EMDRIA’s disdain with the PESI training is well-documented on the EMDRIA website and in versions of the membership newsletter and the monthly email news briefings. The major criticism voiced by EMDRIA is that because the two-day training is not teaching EMDR, according to the EMDRIA definition, it should not be advertised as EMDR training (EMDR International Association, 2008). However, those who attend Curran’s PESI training actually learn the traditional 8-phase EMDR protocol as developed by Shaprio (2001), in addition to Curran’s experiential practice knowledge on how to modify the protocol to be more appropriate to real-world clinical settings (Curran, 2009). Interestingly, others like Laurel Parnell (2007) published modifications of the traditional protocol that are based on practice knowledge, a valid form of intellectual inquiry in the social sciences (Crotty, 1998). Moreover, others have published variation EMDR protocols that have little or no formal basis in research, most notably, Popky’s (2005) DeTUR protocol, yet these variations have been accepted for presentation at EMDRIA conferences for EMDRIA credits (EMDR International Association, 2009).
Jamie Marich, the interviewer, publically criticized EMDRIA on the association’s blog (2009) for overtly condemning trainings that do not meet EMDRIA standards, when EMDRIA-approved standards have no basis in research. Although the traditional Shapiro protocol has been validated for certain populations and presentations (Maxfield, 2007), there is no known research on the effectiveness of training EMDR therapists (Greenwald, 2006; Marich, 2009). Marich, a qualitative researcher and EMDRIA member, has long embraced a concept expressed by philosophers like Paley and Spencer, and also embraced by great writers and thinkers like Chaucer, Emerson, Edison, Einstein and Hemingway: ignorance results from contempt prior to investigation (Keyes, 2006). In this spirit, Marich set out to investigate the merits and deficits of the PESI training by first attending the PESI training, reading Linda Curran’s training manual, and then talking to the developer of the two-day training, Linda Curran. The interview was conducted in September 2009:
JM: Can you tell me a little but about when and where you were trained in EMDR and what your experience was in implementing it?
LC: I was trained by the EMDR Institute at the Doubletree Inn in Philadelphia circa 2002. I was employed in a community mental health setting while attending post-graduate training at The Gestalt Therapy Institute of Philadelphia. One of the directors of the Institute, a master Gestalt therapist with a specialty in trauma, suggested that given the traumatized population with whom I worked, that it might be a good idea to be trained in EMDR. Always the rule follower, I did what I was told and spent a month’s salary on the Institute training. The last sentence, although sarcastic with regard to my need to strictly adhere to authority’s counsel, there is neither sarcasm nor hyperbole with regard to the cost of the training proportional to community mental health’s financial compensation package. Incidentally, although I was level one and level two trained by The EMDR Institute, because of the controversy surrounding my PESI training, the Institute has removed my name from the “Find a Clinician” page of the website.
JM: I completed my approved trainings and most of my EMDRIA Certified Therapist consultation while working for a community agency, so I relate. How would you describe your current clinical practice and your personal approach to psychotherapy
LC: I completely identify with old school trauma therapy, a.k.a. Gestalt therapy. Gestalt therapy is a humanistic, present-centered, relational psychotherapy with an emphasis on contact, body/somatic awareness, and the working through of unfinished business. As PTSD (both simple and complex) is the quintessential disorder of unfinished physiologic, emotional and cognitive business, Gestalt therapy lends itself perfectly. In terms of EMDR, I do EMDR, but I am not an EMDR therapist.
JM: What led you to develop your two-day EMDR training?
LC: I once heard that, it is never what you do that makes you neurotic, but what you don't do. I developed a two-day training for PESI, LLC, a company offering various continuing education programs for helping professionals, at the request of program director Mike Olson. I agreed to develop the training as result of an informal needs assessment I conducted, which included multiple interviews with psychologists and psychotherapists who had been formally trained in EMDR. I was intrigued by the findings and saw a way to improve client/patient care. In the assessment, the things that stood out were that of those clinicians who had been trained, despite the time and capital expenditure, some had never (or no longer) used EMDR with clients. The reasons most cited for this were fear of further harming clients (imbued in the facilitator at the training or developed subsequently while attempting to reprocess traumatic material with clients who did not respond as expected, e.g. the client abreacted or “got worse”), and lack of support due to insufficient peer supervision once the clinician began to use the technique.
JM: Can you explain the general structure of your two-day training?
LC: The general structure of the two-day training follows directly from the results of the needs assessment. Those identified issues are explicitly addressed within the training. That is, fear of harming clients and the problems that are likely to arise post training are preemptively addressed. To that end, the structure consists of an initial comprehensive explanation of the neuroscience of Trauma 101: how it is experienced primarily physiologically and secondarily cognitively and psychologically, followed by the best practices for treating traumatized individuals. For me, the biggest difference between this training and other trainings is the unambiguous differentiation between simple PTSD and complex PTSD. This training’s emphasis within “Trauma 101” explicates the absolute necessity of prior completion of the stabilization phase of therapy before any attempts are made to work through traumatic material. This is different than imbuing fear about utilizing EMDR with this population; it is a reminder to clinicians that reprocessing trauma, regardless of modality, is dangerous when done prior to client stabilization. Further, the training identifies ample resources for the clinician to employ for undertaking client stabilization (including alternating bilateral stimulation in conjunction with multisensory imagery) prior to the reprocessing of trauma. Once participants have been presented with a thorough elaboration of trauma, the training proceeds with resource development and installation: explanation, demonstration and experiential portions using alternating bilateral stimulation with multisensory imagery. Day two encompasses an explanation, demonstration and experiential portions employing alternating bilateral stimulation for reprocessing traumatic material. I teach participants the Shapiro 8-phase protocol in addition to Parnell’s modified protocol.
JM: Many people assume that you are anti Francine Shapiro or anti-EMDRIA. How do you respond to that?
LC: Why would anybody think that? It couldn’t be farther from the truth. Francine Shapiro is a brilliant scientist, researcher, clinician and philanthropist. She has accomplished a feat that very few folks ever attempt, and deserves acknowledgment and appreciation for her enormous contribution to psychotherapy. Shapiro has earned and is entitled to recognition for her skill, adeptness and ability to have conducted the required research that has gained EMDR its credibility. In addition, she possesses clinical acumen from which her clients and students benefit greatly and a charitable spirit that guides EMDR Humanitarian Assistance Programs. If I am in the business of facilitating healing, then how could I be anti that?
JM: Francine Shapiro and others in the EMDRIA community have been increasingly insisting that EMDR is an approach to psychotherapy. What is your view of this?
LC: Without vehemence, I simply disagree. I believe that EMDR is a modality that has proved efficacious in both internal resourcing and reprocessing traumatic material. There should be no need for me, or any other clinician, to renounce his/her chosen discipline to utilize EMDR as a modality.
JM: You call the training that you do for PESI "EMDR for the Real World." What is the reasoning behind this?
LC: Most clinicians came out of grad school ill-equipped to treat trauma, but in the Real World see lots of it. Most of us want training to effectively treat even the most traumatized clients, but in the Real World, time and money are scarce. In the Real World, clinicians work in community mental health settings, prisons, state hospitals and rehabs. Given the salaries and benefits that come with these positions, the time and capital expenditure required for certification (forty-hours of training and ten hours of paid consultation) are a bit unrealistic, not to mention elitist. In the Real World, clinicians have clients with abuse histories, attachment issues, multiple traumas, very little trust, and a marked inability to tolerate affect or distress. Their primary need is safety, yet to process their most personal and traumatic moments, we should refer them to a certified EMDR clinician who they have never met? In the Real World, clinicians don’t claim to be trauma specialists, but clients with trauma show up on their caseload anyway.
In the Real World, clinicians are currently seeing clients with trauma and do the best that they can. EMDR for the Real World is a training for those clinicians. Interestingly, about one-quarter of the people who sign up for my trainings have already undergone level II training by the EMDR Institute or another EMDRIA-approved provider.
JM: There seems to be a general sense amongst EMDRIA members that because your training is two days it is somehow inferior. In fact, many of the EMDRIA members I’ve spoken to seem know only about your training from reading the pamphlet. How do you respond to this criticism?
LC: Well, members of EMDRIA have accused me of being unethical, to which I take umbrage for obvious reasons, including the fact that I am very proud of the training. What further offends me is that not one of them, although invited, has attended the training. That is, except for you, Jamie
JM: Well, I saw coming to your training as the right thing to do in order to be properly informed. I, personally, cannot tolerate contempt prior to investigation amongst educated people. When I sat in on your training, I observed that you encourage your trainees not to fear bilateral stimulation. What is the reasoning for that?
LC: Alternating bilateral stimulation is not dangerous. If it were, wouldn’t it follow that we should all abreact when walking, snapping our fingers, or playing Miss Mary Mac? Bilateral Stimulation is not dangerous, nor is EMDR as a modality. However, when administered by clinicians without prerequisite knowledge to effectively address and treat trauma’s sequelae, the EMDR protocol proves challenging, fear-inducing and, oftentimes, traumatizing for clinicians and re-traumatizing for clients. So there’s no misinterpretation of the last sentence, the EMDR protocol is not dangerous. However, any type of trauma work that deliberately activates traumatic memory networks without insisting that client and clinician are adequately prepared to tolerate the effects of that activation is dangerous and irresponsible. Throughout trauma treatment, the clinician must continuously and vigilantly attend and re-attend to client safety and stabilization. Regardless of the type of trauma processing employed, there can be no substitute for the following: the therapeutic relationship, clinical assessment and judgment, an explicit crisis plan, and instruction in (and acquisition of) skills for affect and emotion regulation, arousal reduction, and distress tolerance prior to trauma work.
JM: What opportunities for continued support do people who take your trainings have following the trainings?
LC: The first hour of the training is about networking. I insist that participants wear nametags, identify themselves, their affiliations, client populations, etc. I explicate the need for continued support post-training, and have facilitators create opportunities for participation in a listserv (on which I am included). Angi Dahl from San Francisco has developed a national Linkedin discussion group for all those participants who are interested in joining. I encourage those who are geographically able to meet in person for peer supervision. I inquire who works with people already using the technique and encourage getting consultation and support. In addition, I offer my website as a portal for connection with everything related to trauma (www.integrativetraumatreatment.net).
JM: What is your overall reaction to the controversy that your training has generated amongst those who are EMDR traditionalists?
LC: Bob Dylan said it better than I: Admit that the waters around you have grown…for these times, they are a-changin’. You get the picture.
JM: How do you see EMDR and other EMDR-related techniques evolving in the future?
LC: My ultimate fantasy is to be put out of my job as therapist, i.e. in an optimal world I’m unnecessary, as there are no clients. Since this isn’t looking very promising, a more modest hope is that I get put out of this job: traveling around the country teaching seasoned clinicians something that they should have been taught in graduate school, if not sooner. And on an even smaller scale (or shorter timeline) I hope that these trainings continue to co-exist for the benefit of those affected by the sequelae of psychological trauma and those clinicians who have made it their life’s work to treat them.
JM: Linda, thank you for your willingness to be interviewed. My hope is that people will read this interview and see that your intentions are not evil; rather, that you are taking a different approach to teaching EMDRIA which stems from the reality that you do not exclusively identify as an orthodox, EMDR therapist. Obviously, there is a need for it or people wouldn’t be signing up for your trainings. I find it especially interesting that such a high percentage of your trainees have already been trained by an approved provider, like the EMDR Institute. At very least, whether people condemn you or not, this shows that something has been missing in the approved training programs and/or in the availability and feasibility of EMDRIA continuing credit programs. The whole issue of training therapists in EMDR is something that I have long believed needs to be better investigated, and I know that there are others out there who are concerned about achieving a proper balance between good standards and exclusive orthodoxy when it comes to EMDR. So thank you for being a part of my desire to learn more.
I would like to say thanks for coming to the training; you only made me a little nervous. But, I sincerely thank you for putting yourself out there in an attempt to present a more balanced portrayal of my training. You’re not only a rock star; you are a brave rock star. You remind me of the guy who the Church said was “vehemently suspect of heresy," forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest. You know that guy, Galileo? All because he really believed that the earth was not the center of the universe.
- Berg, B. L. (2007). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. (6th ed.) Boston: Pearson.
- Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. London: Sage Publications.
- Curran, L. (2009). EMDR and EMDR related techniques for effective trauma treatment. Eau Claire, WI: PESI, LLC.
- EMDR International Association (2008, December). EMDRIA Newsletter. Retrieved from http://www.emdria.org/associations/5581/files/Dec2008Newsletter-smaller.pdf
- EMDR International Association (2009). EMDR 20th Anniversary: Looking back, moving forward, 2009 EMDRIA conference. Austin, TX: EMDR International Association.
- Greenwald, R. (2006). The peanut butter and jelly problem: In search of a better EMDR training model. EMDR Practitioner. Retrieved April 7, 2008 from http://www.emdr-practitioner.net
- Keyes, R. (2006). The quote verifier: Who said what, where, and when. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
- Marich, J. (2009, April 16). Reflections from a diplomat: EMDRIA & PESI. Message posted to: http://emdriausa.wordpress.com/?s=Jamie+Marich
- Marich, J. (2009, August). What makes a good EMDR therapist?: Exploratory findings from client-centered inquiry. Poster session presented at the annual conference of the EMDR International Association, Atlanta, Georgia.
- Maxfield, L. (2007). Current status and future directions for EMDR research. Journal of EMDR Practice and Research,1(1), 6-14.
- Parnell, L. (2007). A therapist’s guide to EMDR: Tools and techniques for successful treatment. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
- Popky, A.J. (2005). DeTUR, an urge reduction protocol for addictions and dysfunctional behaviors. In R. Shapiro (Ed.), EMDR solutions: Pathways to healing (pp. 167-188). New York: Norton.
- Shapiro, F. (2001). Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing: Basic principles, protocols, and procedures. (2nd ed.) New York: The Guilford Press.