<p>First off, I am not familiar with this therapy. There seems to be 251 hits on Scholar (excluding citations and patents) at the time of this writing with a search for "Havening Technique'. Of these 251, there seems to be one single journal article from <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Gursimran_Thandi/publication/284023276_Impact_of_a_Single-Session_of_Havening/links/564afeec08ae127ff98776be/Impact-of-a-Single-Session-of-Havening.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Gursimran <em>et al</em>. (2015)</a>. The publisher of this 'journal', <em>i.e.</em> the <em><a href="http://www.hsj.gr/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Health Science Journal</a></em> (<a href="http://imedpub.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Insight Medical Publishing</a>) is listed on <a href="https://beallslist.weebly.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Baell's list</a> and hence a suspected <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_open-access_publishing" rel="nofollow noreferrer">predatory publisher</a>. </p>

<p>In all, this Havening technique can safely be considered as a technique that has not been described in the scientific literature. </p>

<p><sub>I am deliberately leaving out the reference to the paper, as I regard it a source, not a reference</sub> </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-09-21T15:17:34.760Z
2018-09-21T15:26:12.670Z
2018-09-21T15:26:12.670Z
AliceD
<p>A <a href="https://psychology.stackexchange.com/a/20676/9769">fairly recent answer here</a> offering havening as a therapy has only upvotes. But a quick internet search found a rather brief and contested <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Havening" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Wikipedia page</a> alleging havening is pseudo-scientific.</p>

<p>So what's the status of this technique/therapy in psychology? E.g are there meta-analyses showing that it's effective? And how is the quality of primary research assessed in this area? E.g. is the sub-field reasonably free of publication bias (which nowadays is also assessed in the better-off meta-analyses)?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-09-21T17:56:40.863Z
I am not familiar with this technique, but reading about it now for first time, I am struck that this is almost exactly what Scientologists call ‘auditing’, where the e-meter device is supposedly used to measure responses.
M_B
<therapy>
Is "havening" pseudo-scientific or effective?
got trolled too much this week
# Is "havening" pseudo-scientific or effective?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2018-09-21)

A [fairly recent answer here](https://psychology.stackexchange.com/a/20676/9769) offering havening as a therapy has only upvotes. But a quick internet search found a rather brief and contested [Wikipedia page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Havening) alleging havening is pseudo-scientific.

So what's the status of this technique/therapy in psychology? E.g are there meta-analyses showing that it's effective? And how is the quality of primary research assessed in this area? E.g. is the sub-field reasonably free of publication bias (which nowadays is also assessed in the better-off meta-analyses)?

**Tags:** therapy

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I am not familiar with this technique, but reading about it now for first time, I am struck that this is almost exactly what Scientologists call ‘auditing’, where the e-meter device is supposedly used to measure responses.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2018-09-21. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

First off, I am not familiar with this therapy. There seems to be 251 hits on Scholar (excluding citations and patents) at the time of this writing with a search for "Havening Technique'. Of these 251, there seems to be one single journal article from [Gursimran *et al*. (2015)](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Gursimran_Thandi/publication/284023276_Impact_of_a_Single-Session_of_Havening/links/564afeec08ae127ff98776be/Impact-of-a-Single-Session-of-Havening.pdf). The publisher of this 'journal', *i.e.* the *[Health Science Journal](http://www.hsj.gr/)* ([Insight Medical Publishing](http://imedpub.com/)) is listed on [Baell's list](https://beallslist.weebly.com/) and hence a suspected [predatory publisher](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_open-access_publishing).

In all, this Havening technique can safely be considered as a technique that has not been described in the scientific literature.

I am deliberately leaving out the reference to the paper, as I regard it a source, not a reference


---

