Might it be correct to suppose… If the memory of a traumatic scene is experienced along with a calm scene, this creates a prediction error, which through repetition (of the calm scene) triggers memory reconsolidation and brings the suds down to 0. Now that the traumatic emotion has been deactivated, the memory has become narrative and the schema (to prevent the traumatic emotion) is no longer emotionally driven. Might the schema collapse due to this? Might this collapse be compounded if there was previously a belief that the trauma had ‘lethal status’ (as this would be disconfirmed through flash, and result in opening the window of tolerance and enabling use of adaptive knowledge)?
Responding to this requires translation across paradigms and the language and meaning shifts associated with each worldview of memory resolution. About the first point, yes, a small piece of the memory at a time is brought into working memory and pushed out of focus so that all attention can focus on the disconfirmation of the calm scene. This repeated (sometimes 40 times in 35 minutes) process creates a repeated prediction error and the distress for the memory goes to zero as each slice of it is metabolized. Second sentence, I would modify to: "the memory has become a more 'normal' memory and the schema associated with it has shifted in a positive direction." The schema shifting *in this memory* is simply what happens when individual memories resolve in EMDR or Flash. Now... might the whole schema collapse? It might, but with complex trauma, it probably will not. We have more work to do, because there is a lot of redundant learning attached to this schema formation. I realize that the goal in Coherence therapy is to shift whole schema, and this is the longer-term goal in EMDR therapy and in Flash approaches practiced well. The short-term goal is simply to resolve this memory and resolving this memory causes multiple simultaneous shifts: 1) this memory gets attached to a new, more positive, schema structure... the positive schema structure gets supported in this work (the negative schema doesn't just resolve, the experience being attached to a new and more positive belief about the self supports resilience and future recovery) 2) the resolution of this memory generalizes to fully or partially resolve similar memories in that specific memory network. Resolving a single memory can be helpful in resolving a core belief about the self, but additional work is often needed with complex trauma. Again, in Coherence therapy, you are trying to shift a whole "neighborhood" of memories associated with a particular self-belief. In Flash, we are trying to resolve a single traumatic memory. What is needed to move a "neighborhood" all at once is not the same equipment or procedures as what is needed to move a single house. This is why Flash works with a generally disconfirming experience repeated over and over, but you really need a precisely disconfirming experience in Coherence therapy.
Thank you for your kind reply. This helps me to understand flash when coming from the coherence therapy paradigm. It appears that the symptom-requiring schema defined in coherence therapy is different from the NC/PC self-beliefs of emdr and flash. As you mentioned, the symptom-requiring schema in coherence therapy requires explicit disconfirmation to land and trigger memory reconsolidation. I am most interested to find out if disconfirmation of the active traumatic emotion through flash would achieve the same result. Considering your explanation it sounds like it’s possible but unlikely without further flash processing of other strands in the memory network. So great to have this approach though. It’s a game changer! Keep up the fantastic work and keep the content coming! Brilliant.
Might it be correct to suppose…
If the memory of a traumatic scene is experienced along with a calm scene, this creates a prediction error, which through repetition (of the calm scene) triggers memory reconsolidation and brings the suds down to 0.
Now that the traumatic emotion has been deactivated, the memory has become narrative and the schema (to prevent the traumatic emotion) is no longer emotionally driven.
Might the schema collapse due to this?
Might this collapse be compounded if there was previously a belief that the trauma had ‘lethal status’ (as this would be disconfirmed through flash, and result in opening the window of tolerance and enabling use of adaptive knowledge)?
Responding to this requires translation across paradigms and the language and meaning shifts associated with each worldview of memory resolution. About the first point, yes, a small piece of the memory at a time is brought into working memory and pushed out of focus so that all attention can focus on the disconfirmation of the calm scene. This repeated (sometimes 40 times in 35 minutes) process creates a repeated prediction error and the distress for the memory goes to zero as each slice of it is metabolized. Second sentence, I would modify to: "the memory has become a more 'normal' memory and the schema associated with it has shifted in a positive direction." The schema shifting *in this memory* is simply what happens when individual memories resolve in EMDR or Flash. Now... might the whole schema collapse? It might, but with complex trauma, it probably will not. We have more work to do, because there is a lot of redundant learning attached to this schema formation. I realize that the goal in Coherence therapy is to shift whole schema, and this is the longer-term goal in EMDR therapy and in Flash approaches practiced well. The short-term goal is simply to resolve this memory and resolving this memory causes multiple simultaneous shifts: 1) this memory gets attached to a new, more positive, schema structure... the positive schema structure gets supported in this work (the negative schema doesn't just resolve, the experience being attached to a new and more positive belief about the self supports resilience and future recovery) 2) the resolution of this memory generalizes to fully or partially resolve similar memories in that specific memory network. Resolving a single memory can be helpful in resolving a core belief about the self, but additional work is often needed with complex trauma. Again, in Coherence therapy, you are trying to shift a whole "neighborhood" of memories associated with a particular self-belief. In Flash, we are trying to resolve a single traumatic memory. What is needed to move a "neighborhood" all at once is not the same equipment or procedures as what is needed to move a single house. This is why Flash works with a generally disconfirming experience repeated over and over, but you really need a precisely disconfirming experience in Coherence therapy.
Thank you for your kind reply. This helps me to understand flash when coming from the coherence therapy paradigm. It appears that the symptom-requiring schema defined in coherence therapy is different from the NC/PC self-beliefs of emdr and flash. As you mentioned, the symptom-requiring schema in coherence therapy requires explicit disconfirmation to land and trigger memory reconsolidation. I am most interested to find out if disconfirmation of the active traumatic emotion through flash would achieve the same result. Considering your explanation it sounds like it’s possible but unlikely without further flash processing of other strands in the memory network. So great to have this approach though. It’s a game changer! Keep up the fantastic work and keep the content coming! Brilliant.