Acupoint specificity is a central concept in traditional acupuncture theory but remains controversial in modern scientific studies. Methodological inconsistencies and a predominant reliance on single-dissociation approaches have contributed to this uncertainty. Therefore, we propose a double-dissociation research framework designed to rigorously test the functional specificity of two commonly used acupoints. This model applies double-dissociation methodology to provide stronger causal inferences regarding acupoint-specific effects, where dissociation refers to a pattern in which each acupoint preferentially modulates one physiological domain relative to another. The framework contrasts two theoretically distinct acupoints, PC6 and ST36, with respect to two physiological outcome domains that are hypothesized to be functionally dissociable. In particular, PC6 is predicted to selectively influence cardiovascular measures, such as blood pressure, whereas ST36 is predicted to selectively influence gastric function. Within this framework, a double dissociation would be demonstrated if PC6 produces greater changes in cardiovascular measures than in gastric indices, whereas ST36 produces greater changes in gastric indices than in cardiovascular measures. Evidence of such crossed selectivity would provide strong support for functional acupoint specificity. The proposed double-dissociation paradigm can be extended to other clinically relevant acupoints and acupoint combinations, and this proof-of-concept article is aimed at stimulating future empirical studies that formally test acupoint-specific effects using such designs. Demonstrating this crossed selectivity—where each acupoint predominantly affects only its predicted outcome—would provide compelling, causal evidence for the functional specialization of acupuncture points. This methodological approach aims to align acupuncture studies more closely with contemporary scientific standards.
Chae et al. (Sun,) studied this question.