Brainspotting: What’s all the buzz about?

You may have heard the term “Brainspotting“(also called BSP) more and more lately. Maybe a colleague mentioned it, or you saw an ad for a workshop. The modality is two decades old but has been steadily gaining popularity and generating significant interest among clinicians and clients. What is behind the buzz, and does the method merit a place in your clinical toolkit?

What is brainspotting?

Brainspotting (BSP) is a neurobiological therapy technique developed by David Grand, PhD, in 2003. During an EMDR session, Grand noticed that specific eye positions correlated with his client’s emotional experiences. By holding a pointer at these precise spots and inviting attention to bodily sensations, he discovered this facilitated rapid, deep processing. This observation led to the development of BSP, which operates on the principle that eye position influences how the brain processes experience. 

The technique works by identifying “brainspots”, which are specific eye positions connected to neural networks holding unprocessed material. When a client maintains gaze on one of these spots, it creates optimal conditions for the midbrain to process traumatic or emotionally charged material with minimal interference from the neocortex. The therapist serves as an attuned witness, maintaining a regulated presence while the client tracks internal cues. While some clinicians incorporate bilateral auditory tones, this isn’t essential to the process. 

How a brainspotting session flows

Sessions begin with therapist and client identifying a focus area, like a specific memory, performance block, or general unease. Using a pointer or finger, the therapist guides the client’s gaze through horizontal or vertical sweeps while monitoring signs of emotional activation. The client rates their distress or physical sensations, and when they report a spike in activation (such as increased tension or emerging memories), the therapist pauses at that exact eye position, called a “brainspot.” 

Maintaining gaze on this spot supposedly allows the brain to naturally process the material. The therapist remains present to help regulate the client’s experience, offering grounding as needed. Processing may occur silently through physical sensations or images, or verbally through discussion; both approaches are valid. Sessions typically run 50-60 minutes, with the active brainspotting portion lasting 10-30 minutes. Some therapists enhance the process with bilateral auditory stimulation through headphones, though this is optional. 

The science behind brainspotting

The theory of how brainspotting works 

BSP theory suggests a strong connection between eye position and subcortical brain function. The technique engages pathways involving the superior colliculus and amygdala. These regions of the brain are associated with threat detection and emotional memory. By fixing gaze on a brainspot, BSP aims to prevent cortical interference, allowing subcortical circuits to complete processing of traumatic or stressful experiences. This aligns with bottom-up healing models that prioritize bodily experience. 

Attention to somatic sensations plays a crucial role in BSP, as these physical cues provide feedback about processing depth and direction. Unlike therapies focusing primarily on cognitive processing, BSP targets deeper, non-verbal brain areas where trauma often resides. The approach emphasizes the brain’s innate healing capacity, with the therapist acting as a facilitator rather than director, helping clients access their internal resources for processing at their own pace. 

But the science behind brainspotting isn’t settled 

Brainspotting isn’t without its controversy. As you research BSP, you might even find articles calling it a hoax (along with others touting it as a miracle cure). So why are detractors against brainspotting? 

First and foremost, the data is lacking. Brainspotting launched in 2003, yet peer-reviewed studies are still few and small, often 20-60 participants. Most focus on PTSD; randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are limited, and almost none compare brainspotting head-to-head with established treatments like EMDR or prolonged exposure. For therapists trained to follow evidence-based practice guidelines, that thin literature feels risky. The skepticism here is reasonable: without larger RCTs we can’t gauge true effect size, durability, or who benefits most. The mental health field is rife with pseudoscience and promises of magical cures, so therapists often feel protective of the science behind therapy, and the damage “quackery” can do.  

The theory itself, “where you look affects how you feel”, sounds intuitive but lacks direct neuroscientific proof. Eye position clearly engages midbrain circuits, yet we don’t know if that alone drives symptom change or if attunement and exposure do the heavy lifting. If a therapy makes specific claims about brain mechanisms (like accessing the subcortical brain via eye position), critics expect strong neuroscientific backing, which is still developing for BSP. 

Some promoters claim it works for almost everything, from attachment trauma to sports performance. Broad, unqualified promises raise red flags for clinicians who prefer tightly defined indications and contraindications. Terms like “subcortical processing” and “deep brain access” can sound like marketing rather than rigor, triggering healthy doubt. And the supposed speed at which it works is another concern. 

The reports are anecdotal and uneven. Some clients describe powerful breakthroughs; others leave confused or flooded. Without solid dosing guidelines or contraindication research, results hinge on each clinician’s judgment. That variability fuels stories of both success and disappointment, reinforcing polarized views. 

And then there’s the commercial structure. Brainspotting is trademarked. Only approved trainers can teach it, and workshops cost $700 to $1,000 for Phase 1 (reduced pricing is available for students, but still $400 and up). Therapists pay again for advanced levels and listing fees. When a modality is bundled with proprietary tools (pointers, bilateral music) and ongoing fees, some clinicians wonder whether it’s science or a sales funnel. The concern is less about profit itself and more about transparency and independence of training materials. It can also feel unethical to gatekeep helpful techniques behind a hefty paywall. 

Still, even well-established techniques faced similar controversies in the past. EMDR faced similar pushback in the 1990s. Many therapists remember that history and see brainspotting as a rebrand rather than a novel method. This skepticism often stems from common challenges new modalities face. Initially, these techniques gain attention through glowing press and enthusiastic marketing fueled by their novelty. Publication bias and limited media understanding of scientific studies can amplify their profile, sparking interest from clients and therapists alike. However, a lack of substantial large-scale studies and difficulty replicating results can raise concerns for evidence-focused clinicians. Additionally, progress in research may slow because early adopters are already convinced, while skeptics avoid participating in studies due to doubts about legitimacy. This cycle illustrates why some modalities gain traction without fully meeting evidence-based standards, while other evidence-based treatments don’t get widely adopted. 

So, do the “hoax” claims hold water? 

Calling brainspotting a scam overstates the case. Small studies do show reductions in PTSD and anxiety symptoms, often with medium to large effect sizes. Clinical experience suggests it can help certain clients, especially those who respond well to bottom-up, somatic work. What’s true is that the method is still in an early evidence stage and currently lacking: 

• Large, multi-site RCTs 

• Long-term follow-ups beyond six months 

• Clear guidelines for complex presentations (e.g., dissociative disorders) 

Skepticism isn’t cynicism; it’s part of sound clinical practice. It’s crucial to distinguish between demanding rigorous proof (a valid scientific approach) and dismissing a practice based purely on personal disbelief or negative marketing assumptions. The field is still evaluating BSP’s place, and ongoing research will help clarify its true effectiveness and mechanisms. Until those gaps close, brainspotting sits in the “promising but not yet well-established” category. It remains legitimate to explore but not justified as a blanket replacement for gold-standard treatments. 

Why is it getting so popular? 

So, why are more therapists getting interested in brainspotting? Well, many who use it report that it helps clients access and work through things that might feel stuck or hard to talk about. It seems to offer a way to get directly to the root of certain issues, especially those tied to trauma, by working with the brain’s physical response.  

Some therapists and clients also mention that shifts can happen relatively quickly with BSP, which is encouraging. It’s particularly useful for dealing with experiences that aren’t easy to put into words, like bodily sensations or vague, overwhelming feelings. Plus, the idea that the client is using their own internal resources to heal can feel really empowering, both for them and for you as the therapist. 

Both therapists and clients are talking more openly about therapy techniques these days. Therapists learn new approaches that work for other therapists, while clients are increasingly asking for specific methods by name. If potential clients keep asking for brainspotting, therapists are more likely to train in it. 

Popularity also comes from practicality. Phase 1 training is a three-day workshop with practicum hours built in. You leave able to use the basic set-up Monday morning, whereas some models often require months of study before clinical use is possible.  

The approach blends easily with CBT, IFS, or psychodynamic work, so you don’t have to overhaul your entire style. It works well on telehealth. A pointer, a webcam, and steady lighting are enough. People like modalities that feel active and offer relief in fewer sessions. 

Important safety and scope considerations for clinicians

As with any therapeutic technique, it’s crucial to approach brainspotting thoughtfully. Effective use of brainspotting requires specific training and supervised practice. It’s not just about pointing someone’s eyes in a direction; it involves understanding the theory, attunement skills, and knowing how to navigate how clients process emotions during BSP sessions, especially if they’re silent. 

Low barrier to entry does not mean no risk. Brainspotting can surface dissociation, body flashbacks, or acute grief. Stay inside the client’s window of tolerance, track their breathing, and ground often. 

While potentially powerful, BSP may not be suitable for everyone, especially those who are highly dissociated, acutely psychotic, or unable to tolerate intense somatic sensations. Careful assessment and pacing are essential. If you serve high-acuity or dissociative clients, seek consultation with an experienced supervisor and take advanced trainings. Make sure your clients understand that the method is newer and can stir strong physical or emotional reactions.  

A tool worth exploring 

Brainspotting represents an intriguing development in the field of psychotherapy, offering a neurobiologically informed approach to accessing and processing deep-seated distress. For therapists looking to expand their toolkit, particularly in working with trauma and emotional pain, brainspotting could warrant further exploration and training. Keep in mind that BSP is generally most effective when used as part of a broader therapeutic approach, not as a standalone treatment for complex issues. As always, continued education, careful application, and a commitment to the client’s best interest remain paramount.