Talk:Francine Shapiro

Is it really unaccredited? Is it really inoperative?
Anyone to make a trip? 2247 San Diego Ave. San Diego, CA 92110 --151.50.154.167 (talk) 07:01, 28 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

I tried searching on it and also found various sites that said it was unaccredited and now closed. Shapiro's CV also lists her as a licensed psychologist. I'm not sure how this differs from registered pscyhologist. I'd be curious to learn more. --216.19.177.73 (talk) 22:30, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

"The registered psychologist designation is intended to be a method by which an unlicensed person can perform limited psychological functions to accrue hours of supervised professional experience." this is for California; other states may be different. http://www.psychology.ca.gov/applicants/regpsych.shtml site is copyrighted 2015.Colbey84 (talk) 03:12, 26 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing breaks WP:FRINGE, WP:COI and WP:PROMO and has for a very long time; apparently due to the long-term participation of WP:SPAs. Coverage on Francine Shapiro as part of her accomplishments is, however, entirely appropriate. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:10, 9 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

I don't agree with merging the EMDR article with Francine Shapiro. It is definitely not pseudoscience, no studies have decisively rejected its benefits. You could probably take issue with the article's tone but, IMO, it does deserve to be represented in a separate article as it is one of the known techniques in treating post-traumatic stress disorder (It'a already in use for treatment of US veterans for one thing). There is controversy over the extent of its effectiveness and the reason it actually works, but I don't see why it shouldn't be on a separate page as the controversy is also mentioned in the original text.Omid.espero (talk) 16:04, 2 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

It's not a question as to whether it's pseudoscience. It's a question as to whether there are enough independent reliable secondary sources with in depth coverage. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:58, 2 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

There is an overwhelming number of such in-depth analyses on the subject. It is a hot topic. Just a few examples:

Does EMDR reduce post-traumatic stress disorder symptomatology in combat veterans? David L. Albright, Bruce Thyer. Behavioral Interventions Volume 25, Issue 1, pages 1–19, February 2010

A comparison of CBT and EMDR for sexually-abused Iranian girls Nasrin Jaberghaderi, Ricky Greenwald, Allen Rubin, Shahin Oliaee Zand, Shiva Dolatabadi. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy Volume 11, Issue 5, pages 358–368, September/October 2004

The active ingredient in EMDR: is it traditional exposure or dual focus of attention? Christopher W. Lee, Graham Taylor, Peter D. Drummond. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy Volume 13, Issue 2, pages 97–107, March/April 2006

Treatment of PTSD: Stress inoculation training with prolonged exposure compared to EMDR. Christopher Lee, Helen Gavriel, Peter Drummond, Jeff Richards, Ricky Greenwald. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy Volume 3, Issue 3, pages 185–195, October 1996

Small wonders: Healing childhood trauma with EMDR Karen Appleyard MSW, LCSW Infant Mental Health Journal Volume 22, Issue 4, pages 512–514, July/August 2001

Does EMDR reduce post-traumatic stress disorder symptomatology in combat veterans? David L. Albright, Bruce Thyer Behavioral Interventions Volume 25, Issue 1, pages 1–19, February 2010

The current status of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) J. Spector, J. Read. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy Volume 6, Issue 3, pages 165–174, July 1999

Treatment of choking phobia by targeting traumatic memories with EMDR: a case study Ad de Jongh, Erik ten Broeke. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy Volume 5, Issue 4, pages 264–269, December 1998

There are many more, but I think this will serve the purpose. In final analysis, it's a controversial technique that is being studied and discussed. It tends to polarize the experts, but the consensus seems to be that it is effective in treatment of PTSD Omid.espero (talk) 11:26, 3 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Merging EMDR with this biographical article is totally bogus. EMDR is a widespread psychological treatment and its evaluation as scientific or unscientific, effective or ineffective is totally outside the scope of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a peer-reviewed medical journal. EMDR could benefit from its own article (which used to be here!) and in-depth discussion of its theory. Trashbird1240 (talk) 17:41, 19 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Agree that the merger was a mistake. There is ample reference material to establish notability. What the best of that material says about EMDR's authenticity, accuracy or efficacy is evidence for a content discussion, not for an existential one. LeadSongDog come howl! 20:59, 27 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

I agree that the article is significant and will delete the proposed merge. Chris55 (talk) 22:09, 27 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Looks like a great deal more cleanup is needed after the failed merge. This article should be about Shapiro. Currently, the lede is mostly about EMDR. --Ronz (talk) 16:18, 29 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

i used {which} after "She received her PhD in 1988..." because it was slightly confusing whether the PhD completed was the one for English Literature (mentioned in the previous paragraph), or was for the studies she did at the "Professional School of Psychological Studies." for that matter, her area of study at that institution is unclear; meaning, was it even possible that the institution could award a PhD?

yes, there's quite a time-span between the start of the PhD program in English Literature (1974) and the receipt of the PhD, but, with the mention of a cancer diagnosis and "post-recovery experiences," that time-span is not unreasonable.

so, between the 2 programs of study being mentioned, and the lack of information as to what type/s of program/s she was studying at the "Prof.School of Psych.Studies," this is ambiguous.Colbey84 (talk) 04:02, 26 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Francine Shapiro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20111125094602/http://www.emdr.com:80/francine-shapiro-phd/vita.html to http://www.emdr.com/francine-shapiro-phd/vita.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20111125094602/http://www.emdr.com:80/francine-shapiro-phd/vita.html to http://www.emdr.com/francine-shapiro-phd/vita.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:13, 3 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Francine Shapiro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111125094602/http://www.emdr.com/francine-shapiro-phd/vita.html to http://www.emdr.com/francine-shapiro-phd/vita.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:32, 4 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

It just sounds a bit awkward. I could be wrong. 24.51.220.237 (talk) 01:55, 5 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Bon courage: Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy is a journal with an impact factor of 2.81. How is it a fringe source? I added other sources as well that you might be more doubtful of but the source alone support the assertion. I don't see how talking about her NLP background is "Undue" even if she doesn't want people to know about it. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:37, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

The Rosen source is okay, the (self-published?) PDF not. If we're going to invoke NLP some context is required to make it clear that it's woo. Bon courage (talk) 12:45, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Bon courage If you want to write that it's woo, how about finding your own wording.

To me the fact that Francine Shapiro hosted NLP events and published articles about how great NLP is, is a noteworthy part of her biography.

The current article suggests that Shapiro's story of she discovered EMDR by becoming aware of eye movements involves being aware of eye movements in way that's not typical for normal people. It makes more sense for someone who trained a lot of being aware of eye movements in the NLP context. To me that suggests that the fact that she wrote about the NLP eye accessible cues is notable.

Her interviews suggest that was working directly with one of the NLP founders before completely banishing that part of her background when she started promoting EMDR. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 17:48, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

You have your ideas. Any secondary sources we can cite that say the same? Bon courage (talk) 17:53, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Bon courage The news articles that Rosen cites are other sources that can be cited. If you don't want to cite the article that Francine Shapiro herself wrote because it's a primary source, that leaves Aiming at Superachievers : NLP: Influencing Anybody to Do Just About Anything in the LA Times and Success: Why it eludes some of us and how to obtain it in La Costan. The LA Times article is accessible on the official website. For the other article the long PDF published at the NLP website has a copy. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 16:23, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply