Performing eye movements during memory retrieval is considered to be important for the therapeutic effect of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR). We conducted a meta-analysis of laboratory studies that compared the effects of eye movements and/or alternative dual tasks (e.g., counting) on the vividness and emotionality of negative autobiographical memories with recall only (control) conditions. The databases PsycINFO and Web of Science were queried. Fifteen studies that involved 942 participants were included. Eye movements and alternative dual tasks produced similar vividness and emotionality decreases, with the impact on vividness being strong than that on emotionality. However, eye movements yielded a stronger overall vividness reduction than alternative dual tasks, although the associated effect size was small (Cohen’s d = .29). Because eye movements and alternative dual tasks produced comparable effects, one might conclude that both tasks are therapeutic equivalents. However, it should be acknowledged that only a limited number of laboratory studies were included in our meta-analysis, and the degree to which both procedures tax working memory was not independently established. Although our conclusion cannot be generalized to clinical practice, it does raise questions about the mode of action of EMDR.

在记忆检索期间执行眼球运动被认为对眼球运动脱敏和再处理（EMDR）的治疗效果很重要。我们对实验室研究进行了荟萃分析，比较了眼睛运动和/或替代性双重任务（例如，计数）对负面的自传回忆的生动性和情感性（仅具有回忆性（对照）条件）的影响。查询数据库PsycINFO和Web of Science。纳入了942名参与者的15项研究。眼球运动和替代性双重任务产生了相似的生动性，情绪降低了，对生动性的影响比对情感的影响要强。但是，尽管相关的效果很小，但与其他双重任务相比，眼球运动在整体生动度上的降低要强得多（Cohen'sd = 0.29）。由于眼球运动和替代性双重任务产生了可比的效果，因此可以得出结论，这两个任务在治疗上是等效的。但是，应该承认的是，我们的荟萃分析仅包括有限数量的实验室研究，并且两种程序对工作记忆的税收程度并未独立确定。尽管我们的结论不能推广到临床实践，但确实对EMDR的作用方式提出了疑问。