Pathogenic memories and criminal thinking in judicial settings: Extending the AIP model of EMDR therapy

This article addresses EMDR’s concept of “pathogenic memories,” proposing the incorporation of concepts specific to justice system settings, including victim and perpetrator dynamics, vulnerability and shame, and considering the context of current criminal and legal systems.

Resource Abstract

“Hase et al. (2017) argued that a wide range of mental disorders can be understood as expressions of “pathogenic memories” within Shapiro’s adaptive information processing (AIP) model, and positioned eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) therapy as a method for accessing and transforming these dysfunctional memory networks. Justice-involved individuals, however, often present a dense combination of complex trauma histories, high rates of posttraumatic stress disorder and related conditions, and entrenched patterns of criminal thinking. They typically enter treatment under legal mandate, with limited intrinsic motivation and specific constraints regarding risk, responsibility, and recidivism. Rather than merely constituting a demanding test case, this context exposes a broader blind spot within the pathogenic memory framework: its tendency to rely on a dichotomous representation opposing victims and perpetrators, often overlooking the fragmented psychic functioning and structural dissociation inherent to this population. In this Perspective, I respond to Hase et al. from the vantage point of legal psychology and criminology. I first distinguish, in justice-involved populations, between (a) trauma-related irrational cognitions centered on vulnerability and shame, (b) criminogenic cognitions that sustain offending (e.g., entitlement, dehumanization, and neutralizations), and (c) hybrid beliefs at the interface of trauma and criminality. I then argue that applying the AIP model in this context without explicit integration of risk–need–responsivity (RNR) principles, criminal thinking research, and treatment readiness models risks conflating symptom reduction with risk reduction. Finally, I propose an integrated framework linking AIP/EMDR, RNR, the good lives model (GLM), treatment readiness, and motivational interviewing, and outline a staged approach to EMDR with justice-involved clients. I conclude that the construct of pathogenic memories is highly valuable for understanding trauma-related suffering in justice-involved individuals, but that it must be enriched with a systematic consideration of criminal cognition, receptivity to treatment, and ethical issues specific to mandated care. A research agenda is proposed to empirically test these integrations in terms of trauma symptoms, criminal thinking, and desistance trajectories.”

—Description from publisher

Resource Access

Open Access

Dieu, E. (2026). Pathogenic memories and criminal thinking in judicial settings: Extending the AIP model of EMDR therapy. Journal of EMDR Practice and Research, 20, Article 45. https://doi.org/10.34133/jemdr.0045(opens in new tab)