Can you spot any zombie theories in psychotherapy? Are you a fan of neuro-mystique? Let's dive in and find out.
A Halloween blog post in August? Not quite. This post is about an idea that got my mind percolating, and I want to share it with you.
It gives a name to something that is endemic to science regardless of how "accurate," "rational," "true," or "rigorous" the science and scientists may be. Of course, I'm a psychotherapist, not a scientist. Still, the concept caught my attention, and I began to wonder how this idea might apply to psychotherapy.
Hear me out.
What are Zombie theories?
I recently came across the concept of "Zombie Theories", and it sparked one of those delightful light-bulb moments for me. I thought, "Finally, someone has given a name, and a and a funny one at that, to something I've had a vague feeling about for a while!" The person in question is Eiko Fried, a data scientist in the field of mental health*. Eiko focuses on the statistical measures of effectiveness treatment and models—essentially, he's one of those people I'm glad exists and does their job well, so the rest of us don't have to trek through the complicated tedium of statistical methods and p-values.
This is how Eiko defines a zombie theory in his blog post:
Zombie theory is a false idea or theory that sticks around.
Sometimes a zombie theory was once believed to be correct but has since been made obsolete or discredited by newer research. Other times, a zombie theory might have been based on problematic or spurious findings from the start
Eiko provides an example of a zombie theory from his field: the quest in psychiatric genetics to find a single gene responsible for the development of a specific disorder—such as depression. Despite decades of intense research and significant investment of scientific time and resources, this elusive gene has not been found and is unlikely to exist. Yet, the idea persists and continues to be discussed.
Eiko then explores why zombie theories persist, suggesting some possible reasons that are tied to how the worlds of research and academia operate. However, zombie theories aren't confined to academia, I don't think. In fact, psychotherapy may have its own brand of zombie theories.
Are there zombie theories in psychotherapy?
Applying Eiko's idea of zombie theory directly to psychotherapy doesn't quite work.
First of all, psychotherapy isn't an empirical science.
Second, all scientific claims and theories go through a process of peer-review, which is the gold standard in scientific work and the required method for publishing in any reputable scientific journal. While this system has its flaws and blind spots, it serves as a gatekeeping mechanism to prevent the publication of unfounded claims.
When a psychotherapist develops an idea or theory, it doesn’t undergo the rigorous process typical of scientific validation. And rightly so, because psychotherapy is not strictly a science.
In fact, not every psychotherapy paradigm needs to be backed by scientific evidence. Likewise, not all psychotherapists need to be interested in or knowledgeable about science to be an excellent therapist. Science does not need to have its say in everything that happens in the world of therapy.
However, I would argue that there is one area of psychotherapy that needs to be more accountable to actual science: neuroscience-based approaches.
If an approach is described as neuroscience-based, it must rely on legitimate neuroscience and a correct understanding of it; otherwise, it wouldn’t be neuroscience-based. Are you with me?
To illustrate my point, consider an example outside of psychotherapy. Deepak Chopra, a well-known new age guru and celebrity, often peppers his teachings with quantum physics terminology ('quantum healing', 'quantum reality', 'quantum body', 'quantum field consciousness' and the list goes on). However, he blurs the line between metaphor and literal references to actual quantum physics, making it quantum leap to understand what he’s talking about (pun intended!). Does his use of metaphorical quantum physics language, with a generous serving of artistic license, make his work quantum-physics-based? Hardly.
But it certainly accomplishes two things: it lends a perception of legitimacy to his claims and capitalises on the mystique somehow inherent in quantum theory.
The same principle applies to psychotherapy: an approach is genuinely neuroscience-based only if it leans on findings from actual neuroscience research. It’s not enough to use neuroscience jargon, refer arbitrarily to brain anatomy, or merely claim to be neuroscience-based.
Now, I’m wondering: how much of this do we see in psychotherapy?
How much of it is about gaining legitimacy from science? And how much of it is due to the allure of neuroscience—the neuro-mystique?
As it happens, I genuinely do believe that there can be an immense potential for (real) neuroscience and psychotherapy to come together and achieve something amazing. Otherwise, I would not be doing what I do.
But honestly, the prospect of us going full Deepak Chopra mortifies me.
And I really, really hope we don't end up going in that direction.
It's a tricky one, because neuroscience is so complicated. Some pointers on how to adopt a scientific mindset and develop a critical eye can be found here.
Returning to zombie theories, are there any in psychotherapy that incorporate neuroscience? Are they based on "zombie neuroscience," or do they rely on some form of "neuroscience" that was never valid to begin with, and therefore never had the chance to become a zombie theory?
Alright, alright, I'll spill the beans.
Consider the idea that the left and right brains are fundamentally different in nature and oversee distinct functions—such as rational versus emotional, detail-oriented versus holistic, literal versus metaphorical, or mathematical versus creative. This notion has permeated much of psychotherapy and at this point seems to be embedded in therapists' lingo. To me, it serves as a prime example of a theory that utilises elements of neuroscience terminology (such as brain hemispheres and functional lateralization) but lacks support from contemporary neuroscience. At best, it was once supported, making it a classic example of a zombie theory today.
Does that make the theories in psychotherapy that rely on the 'left brain/right brain' also zombie theories? I think it probably does.
Given the sheer number of psychotherapy approaches that incorporate the 'left brain/right brain' theory, it’s starting to look like a zombie apocalypse in the field.
But aside from the 'left brain/right brain' theory, are there any other zombie theories in psychotherapy that come to mind?
Food for thought, food for thought. And a penny for your thoughts. If you would like to share any ideas around this, feel free to comment below.
As always, thank you for reading. For updates and more of the similar follow me on BlueSky or Twitter or subscribe to my mailing list.
*Big shoutout to my friend and collegue Jehan Ganachaud who always introduces me to some new ideas and research (including the work of Eiko Fried). Jehan is a mental health practitioner working with developmental trauma. He is also a bona fide neuro-geek and we are currently co-writing a piece, inspired by a cool network model, on how to choose the most appropriate set of interventions, when we don't want to use one single therapeutic framework.
Comments