Emotional Freedom Technique and other release techniques

Wasn't quite sure where to put this thread, since Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT) is not a form of meditation. However, I thought it fit better here than general dharma discussion, since it is a method for facilitating release.

Just wanted to get an idea if anyone here has any experience in using EFT or any other personal growth methods in consort with their meditation practice. I was turned onto EFT by Jeffery Martin's work as well as by a sangha member who is also a psychotherapist. My experience is that it is a powerful modality for releasing negative emotions, such as anxiety, depression, and worry. I have also used it to help eliminate pride.

I would also be interested to hear the discussion on the helpfulness of intentionally releasing negative emotions, since I get the feeling that some may feel it's a form of escapism.

YashaDva

Can you give a specific example of a problem you worked on and how your feelings changed before, during and after?

I was depressed many years ago and did several years of therapy which helped immensely. I never would say it "released" the emotions, but rather helped me see the layers of thought process that led to the depression, and somehow seeing those patterns released their grip. I could then see "Oh, right, 'that's not good enough' is my dad's voice, when I got an A- instead of an A in school. It doesn't apply now. The fear that's coming up is that fear I remember feeling when I displeased him when i was a child." That kind of thing seemed to really untangle things for me. It was just talk therapy, no special technique.

Yesterday, I was troubled by a depression that was aligned with the thought that "This is ALL there is? There's nothing more than THIS?" I realize that my yearning for some kind of beyond is related to this. I think my participation here and the greater focus on practical experience rather than metaphysical speculation sparked this feeling. I felt this way during the tail end of the day for about 5 hours. Around 9pm, I practiced meditation for 50 min, focusing on my ajnacakra. I have found this extremely helpful for lifting depression, which it did considerably. I still had the thought though and some remaining depression and decided to employ EFT to see what would happen. As far as I can remember, I did 3 rounds of EFT. The previous thought and associated depression was replaced by the thought-feeling of it being "okay" if this is all there is. Even if there isn't a heaven or afterlife or soul I am okay with that. Testing that sense right now about 12 hours later I have no depression related to this issue and my intuition tells me I still okay with reality as it stands before me. It may return at some point though. We'll see.

Probably. It's part of the human condition. But I think there's a difference between coping with depression brought on my existential angst, and depression brought on by fear, trauma, dysfunctional dynamics, etc.

Meditation practice, done right, will also solve the existential angst. So can religious faith.

In the end you have to figure out what you want and apply the practices that get you there. If you feel okay using EFT, and it solves your problem, then there's no need to bother with all the metaphysical speculating or keep looking for something else. If it doesn't, there are many other paths to pursue. We are really all individuals, and not everyone needs to be a Buddhist or do dharma practice or any other specific way.

Yeah, at the moment, I am exploring EFT, but maintaining a sitting practice at the same time. Sitting is too important to me to drop it in favor of another practice.



I am interested to see how effective EFT is in the long-run. It's so simple that I question it. But so far, I've definitely seen some benefit. And if the benefit is long-lasting, I'd be interested to know on what principles it operates. I came across a study wherein EFT was shown to significantly reduce negative feeling more than a control, but so was a version of EFT that did not rely on tapping the meridian points on the body. So the authors concluded that EFT must work on the principles of desensitization and distraction, which have previously been shown to be effective. However, I've also read that EFT can be used to do distant healing. If this is the case, then that theory goes out the window. I'm actually organizing an informal experiment to test the efficacy of EFT distant healing, if you or anyone else would like to participate. What is involved as a research participant can be found here:



http://pathwaystoconsciousness.freeforums.org/research-participants-needed-for-distant-healing-experiment-t21.html

I had an interesting experience last night I wanted to share. I started seeing this girl about two weeks ago and became attached pretty quickly. This is a tendency I have in dating. I thought she liked me but then the last two days her behavior has indicated otherwise. Consequently, I experienced this very strong emotion of wanting to be with her, but not being able to. This was tinged with great sadness and hurt. I knew I was attached. I wondered how EFT might work for this situation. My affirmation was: "Even though I am attached to Alexis, I deeply and completely love myself." After three rounds, I felt extraordinarily lighter and my intuition told me I was no longer attached to her. And my thoughts changed. They become much more of a "So what if she doesn't like me? I hardly know her anyway and there's a bunch of other potential partners out there anyway that might make a better match." as well as "This isn't necessarily about me. There's not necessarily something terribly 'wrong' with me." Today (the next morning) the feelings that arose out of attachment to her are still greatly lessened and my intuition still tells me I've broken away. I may have to do a few more rounds at some point, but I definitely have experienced fast and significant relief.

Jake2

Jake2, thanks for sharing this. I've not practiced EFT specifically, but I see that the way you applied it is consonant with some key processes that seem to lessen the sting of reactive emotions.

First, you noticed you were suffering. This kind of simple awareness cannot be over-emphasized!
Second, you accepted that you were suffering, and acknowledged you were attached, apparently while refraining from blaming yourself.
Third, you reminded yourself that there's more to this story. You're attached, but you also love yourself, and don't want to see yourself suffer. This helped you calm down.
Once calm, you noticed that your thoughts about the situation had changed. With the sense of urgency displaced, you could view even more details about the situation that took more of the emotional wind out of your sails. You changed the context of the experience, which lead to a change in the experience itself.

Now I'll share something I know from my own experience. You wrote, "Today (the next morning) the feelings that arose out of attachment to her are still greatly lessened and my intuition still tells me I've broken away. I may have to do a few more rounds at some point, but I definitely have experienced fast and significant relief."

In my experience, in isn't usually helpful to make a goal out of getting rid of the attachment feelings you feel for this person. Thoughts are memories, so all thinking is some form of recollection. A variety of situations can trigger memories, which can trigger thoughts, which can trigger emotions. Without clamping off your emotional life completely (which I do not support), you're going to notice that feelings arise when your experiential context supports them. For example, whenever I smell the Love Spell scent from Victoria's Secret, I can't help but remember an ex-girlfriend from 8 years ago. All sorts of images and stories arise, and I used to get bothered by this. But I learned to work with it, much in the way you described, and now it doesn't bother me anymore. Memories arise like stories viewed on TV dramas. They evoke feelings, but they are much less "mine" than they used to be.

My suggestion (if I may offer one) is this: instead of focusing on the result of your practice, focus instead on remembering to practice it again, and again, and again. Yes, it is likely that the occasions of attachment will arise less often, and with less disruptive power. But this result comes through practicing the technique, not through some final event.

I wrote an essay for my Truth a Paradox blog called Why it's OK that Mara Returns: Transforming the Functions of Self-referencing-related Stimuli Through Meditation , and I think it applies to this topic. It's a little dense, and uses a lot of psych jargon, but I think it gets the point across.

Clearly, this technique is helping you to improve your relationship with your emotions. I hope it continues to do so! Feel free to share more experiences.

Hey Jackson,

Thanks for your thoughtful response. Some things stuck out at me:

"A variety of situations can trigger memories, which can trigger thoughts, which can trigger emotions."

Oh my do I know what you mean! I went through this during a tumultuous breakup (for me at least) a few years ago. Now the triggers don't call up memories laden with emotion...they are just memories. I experienced this a little bit today in regards to this most recent girl (there's been so many...kidding!) but it was pretty mild. In fact, I discovered something I find very insidious about my psychology, which I'd like to share.

I am pretty sure this girl likes me. But I was surprised when I asked my intuition to "hear" that I don't like her! (like that...) Then I saw it. All this emotionality linked to the attachment is about needing that validation that someone liking me provides. So when that validation is in jeopardy, my emotions go haywire. In fact, I don't even really have the urge to hang with her, but I want her to invite me to hang with her! A lot of my relationships up this point have been this way: me trying very hard to keep a person close and liking me. It's pretty sick if you ask me. I've worked on the "Needing people to like me" aspect with EFT before, but I guess it needs more work.

"My suggestion (if I may offer one) is this: instead of focusing on the
result of your practice, focus instead on remembering to practice it
again, and again, and again."

My modus operandi for EFT is to keep a little book in my back pocket to record feelings I experience throughout the day that I'd like to work on. So if a feeling pops up that I've worked on before, I still end up recording it. For example, a feeling I've worked on several separate instances is the fear of public speaking. It's still there although not as pronounced. I experienced it today, recorded it, and hope to work on it soon. I am interested to see how this all plays out in 3-6 months if I keep practicing this way.

Thanks for the article link. I'll take a look at it when my mental faculties can give it the proper attention.

Also, there have been some studies done on EFT. I am not very knowledgeable about what makes "pseudoscience" exactly, but these studies seem to be carefully constructed and carried out. One in particular had four study groups in total: three experimental and one control. All three experimental groups showed significant differences against the control; however, there were no significant differences among the experimental groups. This is important because one of the experimental groups had the subject tap on a doll rather than his/her body. So it seems that the meridian theory that EFT is based on may not hold. Instead, the authors offer the explanations of systematic desensitization and distraction, which you may have come across in your study.

Here's the link if you're interested:

http://www.srmhp.org/0201/emotional-freedom-technique.html

Take care,
Jake2

Thanks for the reply, Jake2.

“I am pretty sure this girl likes me. But I was surprised when I asked my intuition to ‘hear’ that I don't like her! (like that...) Then I saw it. All this emotionality linked to the attachment is about needing that validation that someone liking me provides. So when that validation is in jeopardy, my emotions go haywire. In fact, I don't even really have the urge to hang with her, but I want her to invite me to hang with her! A lot of my relationships up this point have been this way: me trying very hard to keep a person close and liking me. It's pretty sick if you ask me. I've worked on the ‘Needing people to like me’ aspect with EFT before, but I guess it needs more work. ” –Jake2

It’s really great to hear that you were able to recognize this need, which you seem to feel quite deeply. Kudos to you! It can be difficult to open ourselves up to these kinds of insights, but doing so is really helpful. When you feel this need arise, the most important two things to do (which will sound redundant, I’m sure) is: 1) recognize it, and 2) be willing to experience it as it is, without trying to fix it. Once you are able to share your space with the need and the associated emotional experience, you can investigate it further. (e.g. How do I feel when this need is not met? If I can’t get this need met, what does it say about me? What does it say about who I think that I am? Is that really who I am?”, etc.).

I read the EFT article you referenced. Thanks for providing the link. This is basically a preliminary “dismantling” study, where they are trying to see not only if EFT works, but why it works, as compared with other effective treatments. What I took away from the study was that the “active” ingredient of EFT (at least for treating social phobia) is probably not any different than that of the established treatments. They suggest the active processes are desensitization and distraction; however, the “distraction” piece is debatable, and desensitization is not my preferred term for the process they’re pointing to.

My opinion, based on the research I’ve read on anxiety disorders, is that the basic underlying construct responsible for the cause and maintenance of anxiety issues, is experiential avoidance. It works like this:

Our fear responses are supported by the oldest, most primitive regions of our brains, which appear to have their own sense of memory (we could almost say karma), which appears to be wired up to our basic sense experience. When this early brain recognizes something as threatening, it reacts (i.e. freeze, flight, fight, or faint) in ways that are most likely to preserve its survival, based on the organisms evolutionary history. This is a good thing in some cases. If you come down the stairs and see a tiger in your living room, it makes sense to GET AWAY FAST!

But a lot of the time, what we perceive as threatening is not really threatening. This is because the human language system works bi-directionally. That is, when I see a cow, I see four legs. Rationally, I know that if I see four legs, it doesn’t mean I see I cow. But, this older part of our brains sees four legs and reacts as if there was a cow (not that cows are scary). This, in part, explains how panic disorder works. We know that when someone has a heart attack, for example, there are usually certain physiologic symptoms. But, the presence of these symptoms does not necessarily mean one is having a heart attack. But that’s what it seems like to the person suffering from panic disorder. What feels bad MUST actually BE bad. Therefore, bi-directional.

This becomes interesting when we look at emotional reactivity based on relationship needs. Research on attachment theory has shown that feeling abandoned by an attachment figure (i.e. emotional isolation) is experienced much the same as actual physical isolation. The implication is that our need for securely attached relationships can be just as strong as our need for physical survival.

Tying this all together – when you don’t feel wanted by another person, the fearful emotional response is very much related to a primal fear that if you are isolated, you will die; you will not be OK. This feeling that you will not be OK is reinforced by the habitual way in which you (or anyone else, really) goes about their relationships. When you fear that someone is pulling away, you may react by trying to get their attention, to pull them back in. Or, you may withdraw in a way that says, “I don’t need you anyway. You’re just going to hurt me.” Neither of these patterns are likely to foster the kind of relationship you want with another person. It seems counter-intuitive, but part of what needs to occur for you to heal “inside” is to heal the way you engage in relationship “outside,” with others.

And that’s where “experiential avoidance” starts to make sense. In order for our minds to no longer encode something as fearful, we have to remain in the presence of the feared situation or thing for as long as it takes for the distress to reduce itself (preferably, by half). You need to stay long enough for your old brain to say, “Oh, that thing over there isn’t killing me. I’m OK. Maybe it isn’t scary after all.” When we stop avoiding experiences that we fear, our bodies and minds change the way they react to such experiences. This is true for both internal (thoughts, feelings, pain) and external people, places, or things.

So (and I’m finally getting to my point), the key ingredient in all of these treatments is increased approach behaviors regarding the feared object or context. The more we run away, the stronger the reactions become.

EFT seems to provide a delivery package for increasing approach behaviors, which increases exposure, and reduces avoidance. This allows for anxiety to decrease naturally, according the workings of the psycho-physical structure we are born with. The extra stuff is probably mostly inert. But, if someone enjoys that delivery system over another, there’s no harm in doing it that way. “A spoonful of sugar,” right?



This isn't just theory for me. I've had some struggles with anxiety in the not-so-distant past, and what I described above pretty much describes how I was able to work through it. It wasn't instantaneous, but it worked. Specifically, I had some relationship issues a while back that were very scary for me. As a result, certain queues from a person in my family would remind me of events that were emotionally traumatic for me, and I would have panic attacks. At one point I was having 2 or 3 panic attacks per day, and they lasted anywhere from 10-30 minutes.



I found the best course of action during a panic attack was to watch it. I knew I wasn't going to die, but they are really uncomfortable and scary anyway. If I was able to get interested in the process, and notice the patterns that seemed to arise, I could stay with the experience until it passed. At one point I was concerned that the panic attacks were not going away fast enough, and I consulted a good friend (a counseling student) about what I was doing. He told me, "Jackson, don't worry. You're doing everything right," and then I thought, "You know what? Yes, he's right. This is what I'm supposed to do." I kept practicing, and they stopped soon after. It's been over a year since I've had a panic attack, but that doesn't mean I won't have one in the future. Sometimes things get out of whack, and it's out of our control. All we can do is approach the situation and allow our bodies and minds to come back into balance. The support of good friends is very helpful.



Sorry for the gigantic post! But, I figured I should probably provide some personal experience in support of my theoretical comments.



Thoughts?

Thanks Jackson for the very in-depth post. I very much appreciate your analysis.

"The extra stuff is probably mostly inert."



There are a number of practices similar to EFT. They are all compiled under the term "energy psychology" even though meridian theory may not actually account for their outcomes. WHEE is method derived from EFT that is much simpler and discards tapping on multiple points associated with meridians. There is a paring down of inert elements going on. WHEE was also mentioned by Jeffery Martin, which is how I became familiar with it. It's also more easily adoptable than EFT because it doesn't come across as "quirky" or "crazy" as much as EFT does to the general public.



I will try to be with and watch my emotions more. I've done this before but not in a long time. Thanks for the recommendation.



Also, did you find the study of EFT to be "pseudoscientific" in any way? I ask because I have a friend who is trained in neuroscience who says she's read all the literature on EFT and that I can assured that it is "roundly" pseudoscience. The studies I've read seem pretty deftly designed and impartial thought. I am wondering if she is just being close-minded as a result of her very rational stance or if I am ignorant in some way.



Jake2

I did not find the study itself to be pseudoscientific, but it wasn't the most reliable study I've come across. The findings were not out of the ordinary, and the discussion seemed reasonable. I think your friend is objecting to the proposed mechanisms of EFT (e.g. meridians, energy, etc.). As I said before, this seemed more like a dismantling study. They were trying to see if the unique features of EFT are responsible for treatment outcomes, as opposed to the general principles we're already aware of. It appeared to me that the results were not supportive of the unique features of the treatment, which appeared to be inert.

This is similar to the studies I've read for EMDR. I should make it clear that I'm not a fan of EMDR - not even a little bit. The "eye-movement" part of the therapy has not been shown to improve the other processes involved. Even then, exposure-based treatments work demonstrably better overall then desensitization treatments. Said plainly, EMDR should ditch the EM, and might want to rethink the DR when a more direct approach would be more effective. There are many other problems with the whole EMDR movement, but I'll spare you the details for now. I'd rather spend time talking about good meditation, or good therapy.

Yeah I thought she might be rejecting EFT outright because of its proposed mechanism. If she read the literature, she obviously wasn't looking at the outcomes. She seems to have conflated the two. Thanks for your input.

Hi sunyata,
I see you have had some interesting experiences with EFT. It's been a while, but I'm wondering how your explorations have progressed?

I remember doing a 10 MINUTE demonstration of the basic anxiety treatment using a simple Thought Field Therapy (TFT) algorithm [EFT is a self-help version of TFT which stimulates all the acupuncture points of the TFT protocols].

I asked the guy who was very much a materialist science advocate and complete sceptic if he had an issue we could work with. He said he was due for a back operation in a few weeks but he was terrified of needles in general, and had been for decades. He accepted my offer to do the demonstration with the fear of needles as the problem, with him saying "I do not believe in this so it will not work".

He said, when thinking about the time when he will have a needle for a local anaesthetic prior to the operation, his fear of needles was 10 out of 10. After the first round, he declared the fear was still 10! So I got him to do the prescribed correction for psychological reversal and did another round. Again the fear was still a 10, just as the guy expected. When asked about the needles, he said that needles in general are not a major issue and he could imagine getting one in the arm no problem, but the needle he will be getting is a rather big one!

We did a third round of EFT and it was still 10! But this time the needle scenario wasn't much of a problem. The 'real' problem, he declared, is a fear of the 'unknown' related to the operation.

He was able to go back to his seat with the gratifying sense that he had shown the technique to be unable to fix his 'problem', while the rest of us watched his initial 'problem' disappear, revealing another fear underneath. As it was a demonstration, I didn't have time to carry on, and also knew the sceptic didn't want to carry on since he had shown a person would need to be gullible and 'believe' in it for EFT to work.

DISCLAIMER
Of course, despite using a number of energy psychology processes on many clients (and myself) with very high success rates (admittedly, usually combined with a whole bunch of other psychological processes & techniques for the surrounding issues) all of this can only be said to be 'anecdotal evidence'.

Hey colin,

I haven't worked with EFT for about a year. I did not find that it worked well for me. Had I utilized the services of an experienced EFT practitioner I may have experienced better results.

I have a friend who is an EFT practitioner now and he says he experiences much success with his clients.

Take care,
Jake

Something Colin said here is interesting in a broader context: "knew the sceptic didn't want to carry on since he had shown a person would need to be gullible and 'believe' in it for EFT to work."

This is an expression of distrust that I've heard in various contexts. Like people not wanting to be "brainwashed" into believing religious or spiritual things that are part of meditation practices. Or saying that meditation is "just a kind of self-hypnosis". Terms like "gullible" "brainwashed" and "hypnotized" all point to not being in control.

But one of the things deeper spiritual/meditation practices reveals is that our sense of being in control of everything in our lives is an illusion... and that recognizing that does not lead to death, insanity or being unsafe, but is actually very liberating.

Thoughts?

When I read an article claiming that, not only does "the placebo" effect appear to have gotten stronger, but that it happens in animals as well-- I was vastly amused. The lengths to which believers will go to defend the truthiness of their beliefs is just astonishing. This is just as applicable if the belief in question is "scientific objectivity" or "truth" or "freedom" as it is if something more obviously emotional, subjective, and nebulous is considered.

As a corollary to "we think we're in control"-- "we think we KNOW." Apparently: not so much.

Ona Kiser wrote: But one of the things deeper spiritual/meditation practices reveals is that our sense of being in control of everything in our lives is an illusion... and that recognizing that does not lead to death, insanity or being unsafe, but is actually very liberating.

Thoughts?

As far as I can tell so far, there is no form of control that is positive or helpful.
In the words of one very wise poet: "All you need is love."

To expand on that, it seems the more love one cultivates, the more joy one receives, and anyone who doesn't want more of that is obviously confused. Control is like the opposite of love.