An open letter regarding the seriously flawed Waite & Holder EFT study

by Gary Craig

This open letter is in response to the 2003 Waite & Holder study in which EFT's effectiveness for phobias was investigated. http://www.srmhp.org/0201/emotional-freedom-technique.html. It was a study that purported to discredit EFT and was seriously flawed.

Even though major mistakes were made in this study, let me at least honor the effort it took to complete it. I admire anyone's dedication to such a task and welcome valid criticism of EFT. It is my hope, however, that more care be taken in future studies on EFT so that conclusions can be more accurate. I present 8 serious flaws below.

Flaw #1: The study was based on a minimal understanding of EFT: It states that "Group EFT followed the treatment procedures outlined in the EFT manual (Craig, 2001a)."

Please note that The EFT Manual is a poor source for conducting a scientific study. This is readily seen in the first paragraph of the EFT Manual. It reads as follows, "This manual is a starting point - an introduction - to EFT. It is a companion to our more extensive video based EFT Course and is NOT intended to be complete training."

There are 140 hours of instructions in our DVD sets that were not reflected in the study. It puzzles me why a 119 subject study would be conducted with only a beginner's knowledge of EFT. This is like trying to evaluate an entire school system having only attended the 1st grade.

Flaw #2: The study included a breathing technique on over 60% of the subjects (instead of less than 5% that was indicated in the protocol). It was supposedly the Collarbone Breathing Exercise mentioned on page 51 of the EFT Manual. However, its description was so different from that given in the manual as to be unrecognizable. This unrecognizable breathing exercise, even had it been accurate, was used 12 times more often than indicated in the manual (60% vs. 5%).

Also, had Waite & Holder gone beyond the EFT Manual for their EFT training they would have seen that, in over 100 hours of filmed sessions, the Collarbone Breathing Exercise was used only once. This is because we found in practice that it was rarely necessary. We teach it in the EFT Manual for limited use (less than 5%) but have basically put it on the shelf. Thus Waite & Holder threw in an unnecessary and unrecognizable breathing exercise for the majority of their subjects. You cannot distort the EFT process like this and still claim a valid EFT study.

Flaw #3: The study included an invalid "Placebo Group": It states, "The placebo group (Group P) received the same procedure as Group EFT, but the tapping points were located along each participant's arm, away from the areas identified as meridian points."

Interestingly, Waite & Holder also referred to these arm points as "nonmeridian points" and thus mistakenly presumed the arm contained no meridians whatsoever. This is wrong. There are at least 5 well known meridians traversing through the arm and thus this "arm tapping" method comes nowhere near qualifying as the intended placebo. Accordingly, since there was no proper placebo control, this part of the study is invalid. Again, I must urge scientists to understand what they are doing before conducting a study of EFT. It would have been a very simple matter to consult a meridian chart and avoid this embarrassment.

Also, it should be noted that tapping these arm points appeared to produce significant results. This points to the possibility that benefits can be obtained by stimulating meridian points other than those indicated within the EFT process. This fact is not new. We have known this in EFT circles for over a decade and a proper study of our materials would have informed Waite & Holder of this well known fact.

Flaw #4: The study included another invalid control group: It states, "As a further control for possible unforeseen benefits of tapping regardless of the location, a third group (Group M) modeled the EFT treatment by tapping a doll instead of themselves."

However, the subjects tapped with their fingertips on the doll (thereby stimulating the acupuncture fingertip points) and, as is well known by any student of the acupuncture meridians, the fingertips contain powerful meridian points. Accordingly, this control group does not meet its purpose and becomes invalid.

Of more importance, however, is the well known fact that EFT can be successfully conducted WITHOUT PHYSICALLY TAPPING ON THE SUBJECT. Thus the doll test tells us nothing new. This has been openly discussed on the EFT website and EFT newsletter for many years. Just go to our in-site search engine and enter the term surrogate (for surrogate tapping). This will bring up a long list of articles wherein people worldwide report remarkable successes tapping for others without tapping on the subject or even being in proximity to the subject. This list includes successfully tapping for animals and infants who have no belief or other understanding about EFT (and thus are not subject to the placebo effect).

Accordingly, the doll experiment added nothing to the basic study and, if anything, served to validate the surrogate feature of EFT.

Flaw #5: The study used only one round of EFT: This unnecessarily minimizes EFT's results. The EFT Manual and other EFT materials emphasize the value of doing several rounds of EFT for each issue. Waite & Holder performed only one round and still reported stastically significant results. Had they performed 5 or more rounds their reported results would have been materially improved. This has been repeatedly demonstrated in clinical practice for over a decade and even a cursory perusal of the case histories on our website would evidence this.

Flaw #6: The study found that EFT was effective in reducing phobias but concluded that, "It is possible that systematic desensitization and distraction are mediators of EFT's apparent effectiveness."

Anyone familiar with systematic desensitization knows that the subjects must be taught a relaxation procedure first and then be intermittently exposed to the feared object or circumstances over hours, weeks or months. In the Waite & Holder study, there was no relaxation procedure taught nor was there intermittent exposure to feared objects or circumstances. Despite this, Waite & Holder mistakenly draw parallels between EFT and systematic desensitization.

Also, Waite & Holder reported statistically valid results that were obtained within a few minutes of doing EFT...not hours weeks or months. Thus the comparison to systematic desensitization is a major stretch and, if there is any correlation at all, EFT should be heralded as a rapid form of systematic desensitization.

Also, EFT is not distraction and anyone with reasonable EFT experience knows this. Sure, the tapping can be distracting but that is the reason why we include the Reminder Phrase in the EFT Process. It is designed to keep the client tuned-into (not distracted from) their issues. As a result, EFT is the exact opposite of distraction.

This was also made clear on page 11 of the EFT Manual wherein I list several reactions to EFT by uninformed newcomers. This includes, "I am told that the tapping techniques were distractions that took people's minds off their problems. This ignores the requirement that people 'tune in' to their problems for EFT to work. It is the exact opposite of distraction."

Thus Waite & Holder failed to understand this clearly stated non-distraction feature of EFT and proceeded to erroneously point to distraction as a cause of EFT's effectiveness.

Again, it is my hope that scientists take the time to properly inform themselves before undertaking an EFT study. If Waite & Holder had done this, the distraction or systematic desensitization speculations would never have come up.

Flaw #7: EFT's results were inaccurately tested and did not adjust for the "fear of the fear": The proper way to assess how well a phobic responds to EFT is to test the result in the real world. This is well known among experienced EFT students. When phobics experience EFT while imagining the feared object or circumstance, they often report a SUDS rating well above what is actually happening within them. This is because they have what we call the "fear of the fear." This means that they aren't convinced of the magnitude of their healing until they get on top of that tall building, see a spider, etc.

Until they do this they fear that they will actually have the fear response under the real circumstances (even though they often will not). Accordingly, they frequently report magnified SUDS ratings in the imaginal phase. This is discussed in detail on our website. Just go to our in-site search engine and enter "fear of the fear" (include the quotes) and you will be presented with numerous articles on this topic.

Flaw #8: Scientific objectivity requires that studies be independently evaluated. Waite & Holder did not do this. Instead, they presented their study to a journal associated with Scott Lilienfeld, Brandon Guadiano and James Herbert who are known adversaries of various forms of Energy Psychology. This throws an unprofessional bias into the mix. It is my hope that future EFT studies will be submitted to objective and prestigious peer reviewed journals and not home-grown, biased ones.

Finally, I realize that EFT is hard to accept for many people, especially when it is associated with such non-western concepts as energy meridians. Accordingly, I expect criticism. But, and let me say it again, I expect that such criticism be based on reasonable experience and proper study of the EFT material. Scientists should understand the process thoroughly before criticizing it. I would ask any future researcher to please learn EFT and learn it well. Then apply it to clients, friends and yourselves to get a solid feel for the process and its results before entering the laboratory. This can avoid publishing erroneous studies.

The more you experience EFT (properly performed) the more impressed you will become with the results. The variety and depth of EFT's benefits far transcend anything else out there and many highly credentialed MDs, PhDs and other healing professionals have discovered this in extensive clinical practice.

Unfortunately, some poorly informed researchers continue to throw stones at what they have yet to understand. However, they will not be able to generate convincing evidence of EFT’s “ineffectiveness.” Nor will they be able to explain it away by insisting that it mirrors conventional technques.

As the reader may know, I am a scientist by academic background (Stanford engineer, '62) and am quite familiar with the scientific method. While properly done studies show the clear efficacy of EFT, I am persuaded that the ultimate proof of the true power of this discovery lies in the findings of quantum physics. In that field, EFT's extraordinary results are to be expected and the astonishing effects of Surrogate EFT are easily explained.

Also, a word for skeptics. Please know that I am not wedded to the meridian theory. Although this theory has not been overturned by anyone since its inception, I am open to the possibility that there may be some other explanation for EFT's effectiveness and thus invite discussions along these lines.

However, please don't contact me about this if you haven't thoroughly understood and practiced the process. You will just be wasting our time as I have been around the block on this countless times with people having only surface knowledge of the process. You must have practical, hands-on EFT experience to understand that EFT's results far exceed those of placebo, distraction, systematic desensitization, CBT and an endless list of other techniques. EFT is unique and represents a paradigm shifting discovery. I am looking for unique explanations here, not rehashes of conventional concepts by those who have yet to be "in the trenches" with this fascinating method.

Hope this helps, Gary

Gary Craig
EFT Founder