Brewin
and Andrews review previous literature to investigate whether therapists are to
blame for false memories of child abuse. In one study, 15 per cent of
participants fully accept a false memory and discusses how false memory implantation
works. The repression memory hypothesis is critiqued as not having enough
empirical evidence to support its validity but nonetheless scientifically
plausible, especially in light of dissociative amnesia. Based on 11 surveys since
1994, therapists have a low 17 per cent belief in the validity of recovered
repressed memories but 43 per cent of clinical practitioners were reported to
believe that recovered memories were accurate sometimes. In short, clinicians
are not as informed as they should be in terms of latest psychological knowledge.
Therapists were more likely to not believe in the possibility of accurate
repressed memory retrieval. Repressed memory recover should not be accepted as
true at face value.
Colangelo, J. J. (2009). The Recovered Memory
Controversy: A Representative Case Study. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 18(1),
103–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/10538710802584601
Contributing
to the controversial debate on recovered memories, Colangelo discusses the
Freudian theory of memory repression which is essentially being used by the
proponents that suggest recovered memories are often true. Studies cited in the
article suggest that interference is more likely than actual memory repression.
However, a critic of that finding is cited as mentioning that it is difficult
to falsify Freud’s theory of repression as much of what Freud suggested to be
influenced by repressed memories are impossible to study in an experimental
setting because it would be unethical. An alternative to repression is
dissociation. Dissociation here means the memory encoded is not erased by stored
in a different stream of consciousness but not consciously known about. Very
similar to repressed how repressed memories are stored theoretically. This
eventually to multiple forms of dissociation. Two “distinct types” are
detachment and compartmentalization. A case study examined and with reference
to a few previous studies, the author concludes that it is possible for people
to recover memories once forgotten with about a 60 per cent veracity rate. The
mechanism behind forgetting memories, however, is not understood here; another
study I cite does research the mechanism, however.
Corsiglia McMahon &
Allard. (2018). Child Sexual Abuse Repressed Memories. Retrieved from https://childmolestationattorneys.com/repressed-memories-child-sex-abuse/
This
website page hosted by “Attorneys for Child Molestation Victims” explains why
childhood sexual abuse may cause repressed memories to be retrieved as an adult
many years after the actual abuse occurred. The page suggests that research has
proven that traumatic experiences trigger a defense mechanism within the brain
to block memories. Further, the page suggests that even if you have “only the
vaguest memory of the incident”, that you should come forward to report the
incident to the police.
Geraerts, E., Lindsay, D.
S., Merckelbach, H., Jelicic, M., Raymaekers, L., Arnold, M. M., &
Schooler, J. W. (2009). Cognitive Mechanisms Underlying Recovered-Memory
Experiences of Childhood Sexual Abuse. Psychological Science
(0956-7976), 20(1), 92–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02247.x
Geraerts
et al., attempt to remedy the lack of research done in how recovered memories
come to be. According to previous research, recovered memories can be false or
partly false but not always by suggestive therapy. The “forgot it all along”
(FIA) phenomenon and “Deese-Roediger-McDermott false-memory task” test are tested
hypotheses in this article. In a double dissociation study, the FIA task had
significantly more false memory reports. Participants who spontaneously
recovered memories were no more likely to have a false recall.
McNally, R. J. (2017). False Memories in the
Laboratory and in Life: Commentary on Brewin and Andrews (2016). Applied
Cognitive Psychology, 31(1), 40–41.
https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3268
In
rebuttal to Brewin and Andrews’ article, McNally provides relevant citations
that may be referenced in writing the paper. There are about five mentioned
factors that contribute to false recovered memories. Firstly, a person needs to
have a belief in a repressed memory of, say, sexual abuse, but the belief alone
is not enough. A retrieval cue or method must be accredited for recalling the
memory. Psychotherapy or a clinician may increase the chances of recovering
false memories. “Magical ideation and absorption” increase the likelihood of
false memories as well as dissociation.
McNally, R. J., & Geraerts, E. (2009). A New
Solution to the Recovered Memory Debate. Perspectives on Psychological
Science, 4(2), 126–134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01112.x
McNally
and Geraerts explore a new solution to the recovered memory debate and the
different interpretations that have been previously formed to explain why
recovered memories of child sexual abuse was found to be false. These
interpretations and the solution proposed by McNally and Geraerts will be
examined and compared to various articles and their findings. One interpretation
suggests that traumatic events can be repressed by the brain but is recovered
years later. The false memory interpretation suggests that traumatic events are
not encoded properly within the brain, however the two authors support the idea
that empirical evidence does not support this interpretation. McNally and
Geraerts then suggest a third interpretation that revolves around the idea that
there is a lack of a memory retrieval cue in recovering the sexual abuse one
experienced as a child and it is through recollective experiences that one recovers
memories, but clinicians and psychotherapists can recover a patient’s memory in
a suggestive way—thus misleading and causing one to think they remember
something they had not gone through.
Sharman, S.J., &
Scorbia, A. (2009). Imagination equally influences false memories of high and
low plausibility events. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23(6),
813. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1515
Sharman
and Scoboria touch on the effects of event plausibility on participants’ false
memories. Techniques and methods one can use to implant false memories of
events are discussed, but what the authors want to further research is whether
plausibility influences recovered memories. Previous experiments and their
conclusions similar to the one the authors’ experiment are discussed. The
experiment used students from an Australian university as their participants. Questionnaires
were mainly used to gather various information such as how clearly the
participants can clearly visualize their childhood memories and certain events
such as losing a toy or witnessing ghosts or demons. The results are compared
to previous research. The authors’ findings contrast what they had read and
discussed prior to the experiment. Participants had clearer and “more complete
memories” of imagined and highly plausible events. Imagination inflation was
shown regardless of event plausibility. By questioning participants on highly
plausible event, participants generated sensory details that were memory
fragments of “genuine” experiences. Event plausibility affected memory but not
confidence ratings. Some of the results were consistent with literature reviews
such as that memory ratings increased confidence ratings. Further, event
plausibility does not affect imagination inflation; participants had clearer
memories for highly plausible events. Imagined memories are confidently held,
regardless of plausibility.
As
of now, the conclusion should be akin to the idea that memories can be recovered
but they may be done so with a low veracity rate. Certain techniques and mechanisms
behind the repression of memories and their recovery will be discussed. The
main idea is to discuss what the common findings are from a decent sample size of
articles on the topic of repressed memories and their experiments, literature
reviews, or books. Repressed memories are usually defined as traumatic memory
that is difficult memory to remember. Other interpretations as to how memories
are lost will be included as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment