| Abstract: | This paper argues that some recent research, which claims to have shown that psychological or critical incident debriefing (CID) is ineffective or can make people worse, does not provide an adequate evaluation of the effectiveness of this type of intervention. Despite the limitations of this research, it appears to have influenced some authorities and organisations to such an extent that many have now abandoned, or been advised to abandon, CID as a response to traumatic events. This paper also argues that there are certain criteria vital to the context, content and conduct of the use of CID which must be reflected in research into its effectiveness. Unless we get these criteria right, CID will continue to be misunderstood, misrepresented and misused. CID is not a panacea for all traumatic ills and it might not prevent the development of post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), as was perhaps once believed, but it is one response, amongst many, which could be used and offered when traumatic incidents occur. |
