↓ Skip to main content

Participant experiences of Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing vs. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for grief: similarities and differences

Overview of attention for article published in European journal of psychotraumatology, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Participant experiences of Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing vs. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for grief: similarities and differences
Published in
European journal of psychotraumatology, October 2017
DOI 10.1080/20008198.2017.1375838
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Background and Objective: Previous research has used quantitative methods to assess the impact of grief therapy. However, rarely have participants been asked about how they have been affected by treatment using qualitative methods. This study sought to explore participants' experiences of two therapeutic approaches to grief: Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) and Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing (EMDR). Method: Nineteen participants were randomly allocated to receive seven weekly therapy sessions of either CBT or EMDR. Approximately two weeks after completing therapy, a semi-structured interview was conducted with each participant. Interviews were transcribed and a thematic analysis was performed. Results: Participant reports common to both therapies included developments in insight, a positive shift in emotions, increased activity, improved self-confidence and a healthier mental relationship to the deceased. Participants also responded by describing experiences that were unique to each therapy. Those who completed CBT described the acquisition of emotion regulation tools and shifting from being in an ongoing state of grief to feeling that they were at a new stage in their lives. Participants who completed EMDR reported that distressing memories were less clear and felt more distant from such memories following treatment. Conclusions: Although both therapies resulted in some similar changes for participants, there were unique experiences associated with each therapy. These findings are discussed in terms of implications for the underlying key processes of each therapy and the processes of recovery in grief.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 78 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 30 38%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 29 37%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 34 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 November 2017.
All research outputs
#24,763,244
of 34,372,222 outputs
Outputs from European journal of psychotraumatology
#1,027
of 1,368 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#250,680
of 363,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European journal of psychotraumatology
#25
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,372,222 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,368 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 363,924 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.