No abstract

No abstract

This study demonstrates that patients with BED display decision-making deficits on the IGT comparable with other forms of disordered eating. Future research should focus on unravelling the processes underlying the deficits.

While initially subject to debate, meta-analyses have shown that eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) is effective in the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Earlier studies showed that eye movements during retrieval of emotional memories reduce their vividness and emotionality, which may be due to both tasks competing for limited working memory (WM) resources. This study examined whether another secondary task that taxes WM has beneficial effects, and whether the stronger the taxing, the stronger the reductions in vividness/adversity. A reaction time (RT) paradigm showed that counting backwards requires WM resources, and that more complex counting is more demanding than simple counting. Relative to a retrieval-only condition, counting during retrieval of emotional memories reduced vividness and emotionality during later recall of these memories. However, the counting conditions did not differ in the magnitude of this reduction, and did not show the predicted dose-response relationship. Implications for a working-memory explanation of EMDR and for clinical practice are discussed.

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is effectively treated with eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) with patients making eye movements during recall of traumatic memories. Many therapists have replaced eye movements with bilateral beeps, but there are no data on the effects of beeps. Experimental studies suggest that eye movements may be beneficial because they tax working memory, especially the central executive component, but the presence/degree of taxation has not been assessed directly. Using discrimination Reaction Time (RT) tasks, we found that eye movements slow down RTs to auditive cues (experiment I), but binaural beeps do not slow down RTs to visual cues (experiment II). In an arguably more sensitive "Random Interval Repetition" task using tactile stimulation, working memory taxation of beeps and eye movements were directly compared. RTs slowed down during beeps, but the effects were much stronger for eye movements (experiment III). The same pattern was observed in a memory experiment with healthy volunteers (experiment IV): vividness of negative memories was reduced after both beeps and eye movements, but effects were larger for eye movements. Findings support a working memory account of EMDR and suggest that effects of beeps on negative memories are inferior to those of eye movements.