The Flash Technique

The Flash Technique, developed by Philip Manfield, is a preparation intervention used to reduce the disturbance attached to a memory the client cannot yet tolerate approaching. The client holds an absorbing positive focus in conscious attention while the disturbing target stays out of awareness, and the clinician cues brief bursts of rapid eye blinks.

Flash is not reprocessing and does not replace it. It is a Phase 2 tool that makes a target approachable. Always plan standard Phase 3–8 work on that target afterwards.

Consider Flash when:

• The client is too avoidant or too flooded to complete a standard Phase 3 assessment on a target.
• Previous attempts to approach the target produced overwhelm, shutdown, or abort.
• The client is unwilling or unable to disclose the content — Flash does not require disclosure.
• You need to reduce anticipatory dread before scheduled reprocessing.

Do not use Flash when:

• The client is currently dissociating, intoxicated, or in acute crisis.
• The client cannot establish or return to a positive engaging focus.
• Stabilization and dual attention are not yet in place.

Training required. Flash is a post-basic technique. Use it only with EMDR basic training plus specific Flash training or consultation.

The PEF carries the whole technique. It must be genuinely absorbing — pleasant is not enough. Strong candidates: a vivid positive memory, an activity the client loses time in, a person or animal they adore, a piece of music, a scene they can hear and feel as well as see.

Rate it 1–10 for how engaging it is. Aim for 7 or higher before beginning sets. If the PEF is weak, build it up with sensory detail or choose a different one. A weak PEF is the most common reason a Flash session drifts into unintended exposure.

The client briefly acknowledges the target — a label such as "the hospital memory" is sufficient, and the content can stay undisclosed — and gives a quick baseline SUD. Take it fast and move on. The whole design of Flash is that the client never sits in the memory, so dwelling here defeats the technique.

This is the step most often described incorrectly. With the client holding the PEF, the clinician cues a triple blink ("blink, blink, blink"), then the client returns attention to the PEF. That cue-and-return is repeated roughly four to five times. That whole sequence is one blink set.

It is not "four or five blinks followed by a triple blink". The unit is the triple-blink cue, repeated, with a return to the PEF after each one.

Between sets, ask one thing: how engaging the PEF still is, 1–10. Never ask what came up about the target. Asking pulls the client into the memory and converts Flash into exposure, which is precisely what the technique is designed to avoid.

If PEF engagement drops below about 5, re-anchor it with sensory detail or swap to a different PEF before continuing.

Every three to five sets, take an unvalidated SUD probe: a quick guess, taken without going into the memory. It is a rough tracking number, not a Phase 4 SUD.

Stop when:

• SUD is roughly 0–2, or
• The SUD plateaus across two consecutive probes, or
• Time requires it.

Then close down and plan the standard protocol on the target. A low post-Flash SUD means the target is now approachable — it does not mean the target has been reprocessed.

The blink cue is the core mechanism. Gentle bilateral stimulation — slow tapping or slow sets — is an optional adjunct some clinicians run alongside, secondary to the blinks. It is not required, and it should never displace the triple-blink cue or draw attention away from the PEF.

Flash has case series, group-intervention studies, uncontrolled and small controlled trials, plus a working-memory theoretical account. Results are encouraging, particularly for reducing disturbance quickly and with low distress, but the literature is young and sample sizes are small. Present it to clients as a preparation tool with promising early evidence, not as an established stand-alone treatment for PTSD.

Flash is built into the platform as a stand-alone guided session under specialized protocols. Inside a session you get:

• An entry gate with indications, contraindications, and the training disclaimer.
• A PEF builder with the 1–10 engagement rating.
• Setup with an optional undisclosed-target flag and quick baseline SUD.
• A blink-set runner with per-round engagement checks and periodic unvalidated SUD probes.
• Closeout with aftercare planning, plus a hand-off into standard Phase 3 when the target is approachable.
• Collapsible bilateral stimulation at the top of the session, with a send-to-client link, clearly marked as an optional adjunct.
• Editable scripts in the script library, and a PDF session report with the SUD trail chart and a per-round table.

See the R-TEP guide for the other specialized protocol built into the platform.

• Manfield, P., Lovett, J., Engel, L., & Manfield, D. (2017). Use of the Flash Technique in EMDR Therapy: Four Case Examples. Journal of EMDR Practice and Research, 11(4), 195–205.
• Manfield, P., Engel, L., Greenwald, R., & Bullard, D. (2021). Flash Technique in a Scalable Low-Intensity Group Intervention for COVID-19-Related Stress. Journal of EMDR Practice and Research, 15, 127–139.
• Wong, S.-L. (2021). A Model for the Flash Technique Based on Working Memory and Neuroscience Research. Journal of EMDR Practice and Research, 15, 174–184.
• Wong, S.-L. (2019). Flash Technique Group Protocol for Highly Dissociative Clients in a Homeless Shelter: A Clinical Report. Journal of EMDR Practice and Research, 13(1), 20–31.
• Shebini, N. (2019). Flash Technique for Safe Desensitization of Memories and Fusion of Parts in DID. Frontiers in the Psychotherapy of Trauma and Dissociation, 3, 151–164.
• Shapiro, F. (2018). Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) Therapy: Basic Principles, Protocols, and Procedures (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

This page is educational paraphrasing for trained clinicians. No verbatim protocol text is reproduced; consult the primary sources and your own Flash training materials.