The Tapping Evidence Base
How It Works (Biology)

Is tapping on acupuncture points an active ingredient in Emotional Freedom Techniques? A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

Church, D., Stapleton, P., Yang, A., Gallo, F. · Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · 2018

Dismantling study👥 403 participants⚖️ vs. acupressure vs. non-acupressure control components (dismantling design)📈 Cohen's 1.28 (large)Moderate rigor✓ Source-checked📍 United States
In plain English. Pooling six studies with 403 participants total, this meta-analysis found that people who went through standard EFT tapping improved by a large margin -- a Cohen's d of 1.28, bigger than what typical antidepressant trials show. The tapping component specifically outperformed comparison groups that used non-acupressure techniques, suggesting the tapping itself, not just the talking or exposure parts of EFT, is doing real work. Since this pools a mix of study designs into 403 people rather than one big trial, it's the kind of pooled evidence that's strong but still invites replication.

What they found

Cohen's = 1.28
a large effect · 95% CI 0.56 to 2.00 · on pretest vs posttest EFT treatment — NOTE: a 2020 corrigendum (PMID 32740561) cor
smallmoderatelarge
00.50.82.5

Across six comparative studies (n=403; three studies with n=102 used in a further sub-analysis), pretest-to-posttest EFT treatment showed a large effect, Cohen's d=1.28 (95% CI 0.56-2.00) and Hedges' g=1.25 (95% CI 0.54-1.96), while acupressure groups showed moderately stronger outcomes than controls (d=-0.47, 95% CI -0.94 to 0.0), indicating the acupressure component was an active ingredient rather than a placebo effect.

How the study worked

Who took partAdults with diagnosed or self-identified psychological or physical symptoms (n=403)
What they didThis dismantling study compared standard tapping against a modified version to test which components matter.
Compared withacupressure vs. non-acupressure control components (dismantling design)

💡 Where this could help

If findings like these hold up in larger trials, the promise is simple: a low-cost, self-administered tool that could reach people who can't easily access traditional care — at home, between appointments, or where there aren't enough clinicians to go around.

🔬 What to study next

The natural next step: longer-term follow-up to see how durable the benefit is, and an active ('sham tapping') control to isolate what's doing the work.

The full record

DesignDismantling study
Participants403 people
PopulationAdults with diagnosed or self-identified psychological or physical symptoms
Comparison groupacupressure vs. non-acupressure control components (dismantling design)
Effect sizeCohen's d = 1.28 (95% CI 0.56 to 2.00) — on pretest vs posttest EFT treatment — NOTE: a 2020 corrigendum (PMID 32740561) corrected standard-deviation errors in this analysis; the corrected pooled figure is Hedges' g ≈ 0.73 (see the corrigendum record)
JournalJournal of Nervous and Mental Disease
Year2018
CountryUnited States
LanguageEnglish
MethodEFT / tapping
Publication typeStudy / trial
Verification✓ Confirmed against the primary source
Verification note. A corrigendum was later published (PMID 32740561) correcting SD errors in the original statistical analysis; effect sizes recorded here are the original published values.

Read the original study →

Cite this study

APA

Church, D., Stapleton, P., Yang, A., & Gallo, F. (2018). Is tapping on acupuncture points an active ingredient in Emotional Freedom Techniques? A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease.

This record is part of the Tapping Evidence Base — an openly-sourced, fully-referenced directory of the research on EFT/tapping. Explore more studies on How It Works (Biology)

Share this study

A ready-made graphic — right-click or long-press to save the image.

Show shareable card
THE TAPPING EVIDENCE BASE How It Works (Biology) Cohen's 1.28 large effect WHAT THEY FOUND Across six comparative studies (n=403; threestudies with n=102 used in a further sub-analysis), pretest-to-posttest… Dismantling study · 403 participants Church · 2018 · evidence.thetappingsolution.com