Thought Field Therapy Practitioners and Educators Sanctioned - Brief Article

Until quite recently, most regulatory bodies (e.g., state licensing boards) in the field of psychology have been reluctant to encroach upon the freedom of clinicians to use their preferred therapeutic techniques. This "let a thousand flowers bloom" approach to psychotherapeutic practice has come under attack from research-oriented psychologists, many of whom contend that the increasing proliferation of unvalidated treatments poses a serious threat to clients and to the scientific status of clinical psychology.

Two surprising developments in 1999 may signal a trend toward heightened restrictions on clinicians' adoption of unsubstantiated psychotherapeutic methods. These developments concern a controversial technique known as Thought Field Therapy (TFT), which was invented in the early 1980s by Roger Callahan, a clinical psychologist and author of The Five Minute Phobia Cure. TFT, which is claimed by its proponents to be an extremely effective and efficient treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder, phobias, addictions, and other psychological conditions, has burgeoned in popularity among clinicians in the past several years. For example, TFT was used by clinicians to treat survivors of the 1998 bombing of the United States Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya, and TFT workshops have recently been offered in many major American cities.

TFT purportedly works by manipulating and balancing the client's energy fields by means of a complex series of algorithms or fixed procedures. While clients imagine an anxiety-provoking event or stimulus, the TFT therapist instructs them to tap various body parts (e.g., eyebrow, collarbone, knuckles) in a predetermined order using their fingers. Later, clients are asked to move their eyes in specific directions, count to five, hum snatches of a tune, and again rap various body parts in a specified order. Although there are no published controlled studies of TFT's efficacy, many of its advocates have claimed 80--95 percent success rates for a variety of psychological conditions.

The first major official challenge to TFT's legitimacy occurred in mid-1999, when the Arizona Board of Psychological Examiners sanctioned a psychologist who used TFT as his principal therapeutic modality. This clinician was placed on probation, ordered to refrain from administering TFT within the practice of psychology, and informed that he would be strictly monitored for compliance with this order. Foremost among the reasons for the board's action was the therapist's inability to substantiate his advertised claims of effectiveness.

Another reason was the therapist's use of a TFT technique known as voice technology, which involves an electronic device to convert the client's voice into a visual display. Voice technology ostensibly allows clinicians to diagnose the client's energy blocks over the telephone and then prescribe a formal course of TFT treatment without ever having to meet the client in person. The therapist disciplined by the Arizona Board had refused to disclose information concerning the voice technology device, and invoked a confidentiality agreement with Dr. Callahan regarding this device as the rationale for his refusal.

In recognition of the Arizona Board's decision, the Science and Pseudoscience Review committee, a newly formed special interest group within the Association for Advancement of Behavior Therapy (AABT), bestowed its first annual Scientific and Professional Integrity Award upon the boar at the November 1999 AABT convention in Toronto.

In September 1999, the American Psychological Association (APA) Continuing Professional Education Committee ruled that the absence of any compelling scientific support for its efficacy rendered TFT an inappropriate subject for Continuing Education (CE) courses. These courses are taken on an ongoing basis by practitioners in order to fulfill licensure requirements. As a result of the decision, CE sponsors who proposed to offer courses focused primarily on TFT were informed that their applications would no longer be approved. In recent years, many scientifically oriented psychologists have sharply criticized APA for failing to set limits on the content of CE courses, which have included workshops on calligraphy therapy, Jungian sandplay therapy, and other unvalidated techniques. As a consequence, APA's actions have been hailed by a number of psychologists as a significant step toward addressing these criticisms.

The actions of the Arizona Board and APA have been met with numerous protests from TFT proponents, many of whom maintain that their method has been unfairly targeted. Indeed, a number of similarly unsubstantiated psychotherapies have largely escaped the close scrutiny of regulatory bodies. In the eyes of some observers, however, these two recent actions may herald a shift away from a laissez-faire approach to psychotherapeutic practice and toward heightened clinician accountability.

Scott O. Lilienfeld, Ph.D., is an assistant professor of psychology at Emory University and a SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Consulting Editor. Jeffrey M. Lohr, Ph.D., is a professor of psychology at the University of Arkansas and President of the AABT Science and Pseudoscience Review Special Interest Group.

COPYRIGHT 2000 Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal
COPYRIGHT 2003 Gale Group