Imagery rescripting as a clinical intervention for aversive memories: A meta-analysis
Open accessAbstract
Background and objectives Literature suggests that imagery rescripting (ImRs) is an effective psychological intervention.Methods We conducted a meta-analysis of ImRs for psychological complaints that are associated with aversive memories. Relevant publications were collected from the databases Medline, PsychInfo, and Web of Science.Results The search identified 19 trials (including seven randomized controlled trials) with 363 adult patients with posttraumatic stress disorder (eight trials), social anxiety disorder (six trials), body dysmorphic disorder (two trials), major depression (one trial), bulimia nervosa (one trial), or obsessive compulsive disorder (one trial). ImRs was administered over a mean of 4.5 sessions (range, 1-16). Effect size estimates suggest that ImRs is largely effective in reducing symptoms from pretreatment to posttreatment and follow-up in the overall sample (Hedges' g = 1.22 and 1.79, respectively). The comparison of ImRs to passive treatment conditions resulted in a large effect size (g = 0.90) at posttreatment. Finally, the effects of ImRs on comorbid depression, aversive imagery, and encapsulated beliefs were also large.Limitations Most of the analyses involved pre-post comparisons and the findings are limited by the small number of randomized controlled trials.Conclusions Our findings indicate that ImRs is a promising intervention for psychological complaints related to aversive memories, with large effects obtained in a small number of session.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 52 · Cited by 282
- Authors
- Morina, N., Lancee, J., & Arntz, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Amsterdam (NL)
- Venue
- Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-06
- Volume
- 55
- Pages
- 6-15
- ISSN
- 0005-7916 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2557111467
- Cited by
- 282
- References
- 52
- Citations by year
- 2026: 37 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 5
- FWCI
- 2.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Keywords
- imagery rescripting, aversive memory, post-traumatic stress disorder, social anxiety disorder, body dysmorphic disorder, major depressive disorder, bulimia nervosa, obsessive-compulsive disorder, comorbid depression, psychological intervention
- MeSH terms
- Mental Disorders, Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, Databases, Bibliographic, Treatment Outcome, Imagery, Psychotherapy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review