Corrigendum Supports Therapeutic Contribution of Acupoint Tapping to EFTs' Observed Effects

Abstract

We published a meta-analysis of studies that examined the various components of an evidence-based therapy called emotional freedom techniques (EFTs). EFT uses elements of conventional therapies such as exposure and cognitive processing but includes the unique ingredient of acupoint stimulation using fingertip tapping. Six studies were identified, and three of these met the quality control criteria of the American Psychological Association's Division 12 Task Force for Empirically Validated Therapies. Meta-analysis found that the acupoint component of EFT was not an inert ingredient or inactive placebo but made an active contribution to the therapeutic effects noted in a research literature that now numbers over 100 clinical trials of EFT. Subsequent to publication, errors in the original analysis were identified, primarily incorrect standard deviations. A new analysis was performed by an independent statistician and found slightly greater effects than the original investigation. The results were published as a corrigendum, which was subsequently challenged by Spielmans. Here we examine the critiques of the corrigendum and original article. We find that although they may be of academic interest, they are irrelevant to the central research question of whether the acupoint component of EFT is inert or active. We reaffirm that the evidence clearly validates the contribution made by acupoint tapping to EFT's observed clinical effects.

Acupressure in psychotherapy as an unsinkable rubber duck: A reply to Feinstein (2023).

“…In the original meta-analysis (Church et al, 2018), the authors examined whether acupressure was an active ingredient in EFT. Church and colleagues meta-analyzed three studies that purportedly isolated acupressure and concluded hat acupressure was an active ingredient of EFT and that EFT 2 However, a close look at the EFT manual (Church, 2017) demonstrates that EFT's supposed "cognitive" interventions do not necessarily resemble common empirically supported cognitive interventions. Instead, EFT proposes that tapping while using a self-acceptance statement (e.g., "Even though [problem], I deeply and completely accept myself"; Church, 2017, p. 272) produces cognitive shifts "toward feelings of being at peace, of having moved on, of being safe" (Church, 2017, p. 185).…”

“…Importantly, in this corrigendum, Church et al (2020) analyzed follow-up data rather than the original posttreatment end points used in Church et al (2018). Thus, the concerns of Spielmans et al (2020) were not directly addressed in this corrigendum nor later replies (Church et al, 2022).…”

“…The meta-analysis presented as evidence of acupressure as an active ingredient (Church et al, 2018) has been heavily criticized, especially on methodological grounds (Spielmans & Rosen, 2022; Spielmans et al, 2020), and, contrary to Feinstein’s claim, the challenges with this meta-analysis have not, in our opinion, “been addressed” (Feinstein, 2023, p. 59). Here, we briefly summarize the original meta-analysis (Church et al, 2018) and subsequent critiques (Spielmans & Rosen, 2022; Spielmans et al, 2020) and responses (Church et al, 2020, 2022). In the original meta-analysis (Church et al, 2018), the authors examined whether acupressure was an active ingredient in EFT.…”

Integrating the manual stimulation of acupuncture points into psychotherapy: A systematic review with clinical recommendations.

“…The six studies prior to Mehdipour et al were evaluated in a review and meta-analysis which concluded that “the acupressure component was an active ingredient and outcomes were not due solely to placebo, nonspecific effects of any therapy, or nonacupressure components” (Church et al, 2018, p. 783). Challenges to this conclusion have been posed (Spielmans et al, 2020; Spielmans & Rosen, 2022) and addressed (Church, Stapleton, Kip, et al, 2020; Church et al, 2022).…”