|
A repressed memory is the memory
of a traumatic event unconsciously retained in the mind, where it is said to adversely affect conscious thought, desire, and
action.
It is common to consciously repress unpleasant
experiences. Many psychologists believe that unconscious repression of traumatic experiences such as sexual abuse
or rape is a defense mechanism which backfires. The unpleasant experience is forgotten but not forgiven. It lurks beneath
consciousness and allegedly causes a myriad of psychological and physical problems from bulimia to insomnia to suicide.
The theory of unconsciously
repressing the memory of traumatic experiences is controversial. There is little scientific evidence to support either the
notion that traumatic experiences are typically unconsciously repressed or that unconscious memories of traumatic events are
significant causal factors in physical or mental illness. Most people do not forget traumatic experiences unless they are
rendered unconscious at the time of the experience. No one has identified a single case where a specific traumatic experience
in childhood was repressed and the repressed memory of the event, rather than the event itself, caused a specific psychiatric
or physical disorder in adulthood.[i]
The strength of the
scientific evidence for repression depends on exactly how the term is defined. When defined narrowly as intentional suppression
of an experience, there is little reason to doubt that it exists. But when we talk about a repression mechanism that operates
unconsciously and defensively to block out traumatic experiences, the picture becomes considerably murkier.
Evidence concerning
memory for real-life traumas in children and adults indicates that these events--such as the Chowchilla kidnappings, the sniper
killing at an elementary school, or the collapse of skywalks at a Kansas City hotel--are generally well remembered....complete
amnesia for these terrifying episodes is virtually nonexistent (Schacter 1996, 256).
Psychologist Lenore Terr, a defender of repressed memory therapy, argues that repression occurs for repeated or multiple traumas,
such as a repeatedly abused child. Schacter notes that "hundreds of studies have shown that repetition of information leads
to improved memory, not loss of memory, for that information." He also notes that people who have experienced repeated traumas
in war, even children, generally remember their experiences. A person who suffers a great trauma often finds that she cannot
get the event out of her mind or dreams. Terr's theory is that the child becomes practiced at repression to banish the awful
events from awareness, and forgetting might aid in the child's survival. Her dissociative theory, however, is based on speculation rather than scientific evidence.
Most psychologists accept as fact that it is quite
common to consciously repress unpleasant experiences, even sexual abuse, and to spontaneously remember such events
long afterward. Most of the controversy centers around recovered memories during repressed memory therapy (RMT). Critics of RMT maintain that many therapists are not helping patients
recover repressed memories, but are suggesting and planting false memories of alien abduction, sexual abuse, and satanic rituals.
See related entries on dianetics, hypnosis, false memory, mind, multiple personality disorder, repressed memory, repressed memory therapy, and the unconscious.
further reading
Ashcraft, Mark H. Human Memory and Cognition (Addison-Wesley
Pub Co., 1994).
Baddeley, Alan D. Human Memory: Theory and Practice
(Allyn & Bacon, 1998).
Baker, Robert A. Hidden Memories: Voices and Visions From
Within (Buffalo, N.Y. : Prometheus Books, 1992).
Hallinan, Joseph T. "Money for repressed memories
repressed," Sacramento Bee, Jan. 12, 1997, Forum.
Loftus, Elizabeth. The Myth of Repressed Memory (New
York: St. Martin's, 1994).
Schacter, Daniel L., editor, Memory Distortion: How Minds,
Brains, and Societies Reconstruct the Past (Harvard University Press, 1997).
Schacter, Daniel L. Searching for Memory - the brain, the
mind, and the past (New York: Basic Books, 1996).
Schacter, Daniel L. The Seven Sins of Memory : How the
Mind Forgets and Remembers (Houghton Mifflin Co., 2001).
[i] The failure to
provide independent, solid collaboration of such events, which in numerous cases if real would have witnesses, entails that
such events must be extremely rare and the search for them as a common cause is misplaced.
memory
From http://skepdic.com/memory.html, from the book The Skeptic’s Dictionary, by Robert Todd Carroll. An excellent account of the various theories of memories. The
skeptic of course doubts that there is a mind, and thus all of the theories about the mind such as symbolism is dreams, repressed
memories, and so on. Theories of mind “smack” of spiritualism with
their soul in the machine.
Memory is the retention of,
and ability to recall, information, personal experiences, and procedures (skills and habits).
There is no universally agreed
upon model of the mind/brain, and no universally agreed upon model of how memory works. Nevertheless, a good
model for how memory works must be consistent with the subjective nature of consciousness and with what is known from scientific
studies (Schacter 1996). Subjectivity in remembering involves at least three important factors:
1. Memories are constructions made in accordance with present
needs, desires, influences, etc.
2. Memories are often accompanied by feelings and emotions.
3. Memory usually involves awareness of the memory (Schacter
1996).
Two models of thinking which
are popular with materialists are the behaviorist model (thinking is a set of behaviors) and that of cognitive
psychology (the brain is like a computer). Neither can account for the subjective and present-need basis of memory (Schacter
1996). The Freudian model posits an area of the unconscious where memories of traumatic experiences are stored. Though unconscious of them,
such memories are claimed to be significant causal factors in shaping conscious thought and behavior. This model is not consistent
with what is known about the memory of traumatic experiences. There is a great deal of supportive evidence for the claim that
the more traumatic an experience, the more likely one is to remember it. Novel visual images, which would frequently
accompany traumas, stimulate the hippocampus and left inferior prefrontal cavity and generally become part of long-term memory.
Current studies in neuroscience
strongly support the notion that a memory is a set of encoded neural connections. Encoding can take place in several parts
of the brain. Thus, neural connections are likely to go across various parts of the brain. The stronger the connections, the
stronger the memory. Recollection of an event can occur by a stimulus to any of the parts of the brain where a neural connection
for the memory occurs. If part of the brain is damaged, access to any neural data that was there is lost. On the other hand,
if the brain is healthy and a person is fully conscious when experiencing some trauma, the likelihood that they will forget
the event is nearly zero, unless either they are very young or they experience a brain injury.
Furthermore, the Freudian model
often assumes that childhood sexual abuse is usually unconsciously repressed and that psychological problems in adulthood are caused by the unconscious memory
of childhood abuse. There is, however, no body of scientific evidence to support either that such abuse is unconsciously
repressed or that these experiences are significant causal factors of adult
psychological problems.
Finally, the model of memory that sees the brain
recording everything one experiences is a model that contradicts what is known about how memories are constructed. Even so,
in a survey of psychologists by Loftus and Loftus, 84% said they believe every experience is permanently stored in the mind
(Schacter 1996, 76).
a popular model of memory
One of the most popular models
of memory sees memory as a present act of consciousness, reconstructive of the past, stimulated by an analogue of an engram
called the "retrieval cue." The engram is the neural network representing fragments of past experiences which have been encoded.
The evidence is strong that there are distinct types and elements of memory which involve different parts of the brain, e.g.,
the hippocampus and ongoing incidents of day-to-day living (short-term or working memory); the amygdala
and emotional memories (Schacter 1996, 213). Memories might better be thought of as a collage or a jigsaw puzzle than
as "tape recordings," "pictures" or "video clips" stored as wholes. On this model, perceptual or conscious experience does
not record all sense data experienced. Most sense data is not stored at all. What is stored are bits and fragments of experience
which are encoded in engrams. Exactly how they are encoded is not completely understood.
This popular model of memory
rejects the idea that individual memories are stored in distinct locations in the brain. That idea seems to have become solidified
by Wilder Graves Penfield's experiments done in the 1950's. He placed electrodes on the surface of the exposed temporal lobes
of patients and was able to elicit "memories" in 40 of 520 patients. Many psychologists (and lay people) refer to these experiments
as proof that memories are just waiting for the right stimulus to be evoked. Schacter points out that the Penfield experiments
are not very good evidence for this belief. Not only could Penfield only elicit "memories" in about one out of every thirteen
patients, he did not provide support for the claim that what was elicited was actually a memory and not a hallucination, fantasy
or confabulation.
forgetting
On the model described in the previous two paragraphs,
forgetting is due to either
1. weak encoding (why we forget most things, including our nightly
dreams);
2. lack of a retrieval cue (we seem to need something to stimulate
memory);
3. time and the replacement in the neural network by later experiences
(how many experiences do you remember from many years ago?);
4. repetitive experiences (you'll remember the one special meal
you had at a special restaurant, but you won't remember what you had for lunch a year ago Tuesday), or
5. a drive to keep us sane. (Imagine
the brain overload that would occur if we were to never forget anything, the stated goal of L. Ron Hubbard's dianetics. His followers should read Jorge Luis Borges "Funes, the Memorious," a story about such a being.)
The chances of remembering
something improve by "consolidation," which creates strong encoding. Thinking and talking about an experience enhance the
chances of remembering it. One of the better known techniques of remembering involves the process of association.
source memory
Many people have vivid and
substantially accurate memories of events which are erroneous in one key aspect: the source of the memory. For example:
In the 1980 presidential
campaign, Ronald Reagan repeatedly told a heartbreaking story of a World War II bomber pilot who ordered his crew to bail
out after his plane had been seriously damaged by an enemy hit. His young belly gunner was wounded so seriously that he was
unable to evacuate the bomber. Reagan could barely hold back his tears as he uttered the pilot's heroic response: "Never mind.
We'll ride it down together." ...this story was an almost exact duplicate of a scene in the 1944 film "A Wing and a Prayer."
Reagan had apparently retained the facts but forgotten their source (Schacter 1996, 287).
An even more dramatic case
of source amnesia (also called memory misattribution) is that of the woman who accused memory expert Dr. Donald
Thompson of having raped her. Thompson was doing a live interview for a television program just before the rape occurred.
The woman had seen the program and "apparently confused her memory of him from the television screen with her memory of the
rapist" (Schacter 1996, 114). Studies by Marcia Johnson et al. have shown that the ability to distinguish memory from imagination
depends on the recall of source information.
Tom Kessinger, a mechanic at
Elliott's Body Shop in Junction City, Kansas, gave a detailed description of two men he said had rented a Ryder truck like
the one used in the Oklahoma City bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building. One looked just like Timothy McVeigh.
The other wore a baseball cap and a T-shirt, and had a tattoo above the elbow on his left arm. That was Todd Bunting, who
had rented a truck the day before McVeigh. Kessinger mixed the two memories but was absolutely certain the two came
in together.
Jean Piaget, the great child
psychologist, claimed that his earliest memory was of nearly being kidnapped at the age of two. He remembered details such
as sitting in his baby carriage, watching the nurse defend herself against the kidnapper, scratches on the nurse's face, and
a police officer with a short cloak and a white baton chasing the kidnapper away. The story was reinforced by the nurse, the
family, and others who had heard the story. Piaget was convinced that he remembered the event. However, it never happened.
Thirteen years after the alleged kidnapping attempt, Piaget's former nurse wrote to his parents to confess that she had made
up the entire story. Piaget later wrote that "I therefore must have heard, as a child, the account of this story...and projected
it into the past in the form of a visual memory, which was a memory of a memory, but false" (Tavris).
amnesia and implicit memory
Though all forgetting is a
type of amnesia, we usually reserve that term for forgetting that is caused by the effects of drugs/alcohol, brain injuries,
or physical or psychological traumas. One of the more interesting types of amnesia is what psychiatrists call the fugue state. An otherwise healthy person travels a good distance from his home, and
when found has no memory of how he got there or who he is. The fugue state is usually attributed to recent emotional trauma.
It is rare and is typically neither permanent nor recurring.
Limited amnesia,
however, is quite common. Limited amnesia occurs in people who suffer a severe physical or psychological trauma, such as a
concussion or being rendered unconscious. Football players who suffer concussions, and accident victims who are rendered unconscious,
typically do not remember what happened immediately before the event. The scientific evidence indicates, however, that some
sort of implicit memory may exist, which can be troubling to one whose amnesia is due to having been rendered unconscious
by an assailant. Schacter notes the case of a rape victim who could not remember the rape, which took place on a brick pathway.
The words 'brick' and 'path' kept popping into her mind, but she did not connect them to the rape. She became very
upset when taken back to the scene of the rape, though she didn't remember what had happened there (Schacter 1996, 232).
Implicit memory
is memory without awareness. It differs substantially from repressed memory. Implicit memories are not necessarily repressed, nor are they necessarily the
result of trauma. They are weakly encoded memories which can affect conscious thought and behavior. Retrieval cues do not
bring about a complete memory of some events because most of the event was not encoded.
Daniel Schacter and Endel Tulving
introduced the terms 'implicit memory' and 'explicit memory' in their attempt to find a common language for those who believe
there are several distinct memory systems and those who maintain there is only one such system. Schacter writes: "The nonconscious
world of implicit memory revealed by cognitive neuroscience differs markedly from the Freudian unconscious. In Freud's vision,
unconscious memories are dynamic entities embroiled in a fight against the forces of repression; they result from special
experiences that relate to our deepest conflicts and desires. . . .[I]mplicit memories . . . arise as a natural consequence
of such everyday activities as perceiving, understanding, and acting" (Schacter, 1996, 190-191).
Most lost memories are lost
because they were never elaborately encoded. Perception is mostly a filtering and defragmenting process. Our interests and
needs affect perception, but most of what is available to us as potential sense data will never be processed. And most of
what is processed will be forgotten. Amnesia is not rare, but is the standard condition of the human species. We do not forget
simply to avoid being reminded of unpleasant things. We forget either because we did not perceive closely in the first place
or we did not encode the experience either in the parietal lobes of the cortical surface (for short-term or working
memory) or in the prefrontal lobe (for long-term memory).
Long-term memory
requires elaborative encoding in the inner part of the temporal lobes. If the left inferior prefrontal lobe is damaged or
undeveloped, there will be grave difficulty with elaborative encoding. This area of the brain is undeveloped in very young
children (under the age of three). Hence, it is very unlikely that any story of having a memory of life in the cradle or in
the womb is accurate. The brains of infants and very young children are capable of storing fragmented memories, however. Such
memories cannot be explicit or deeply encoded, but they can nevertheless have influence. In fact, there are numerous situations--such
as cryptomnesia-- where memory can be manifested without awareness of remembering.
semantic, procedural, and episodic memory
Memory researchers
distinguish several types of memory systems. Semantic memory contains conceptual and factual knowledge. Procedural
memory allows us to learn new skills and acquire habits. Episodic memory allows us to recall personal incidents that
uniquely define our lives (Schacter, 1996, 17). Another important distinction is that between field and observer
memory. Field memories are those where one sees oneself in the scene. Observer memories are those seen through one's own eyes.
The fact that many memories are field memories is evidence, as Freud noted, of the reconstructive nature of memories
(Schacter, 1996, 21).
accuracy of memory
How accurate and reliable is
memory? Studies on memory have shown that we often construct our memories after the fact, that we are susceptible to suggestions
from others that help us fill in the gaps in our memories. That is why, for example, a police officer investigating a crime
should not show a picture of a single individual to a victim and ask if the victim recognizes the assailant. If the victim
is then presented with a line-up and picks out the individual whose picture the victim had been shown, there is no way of
knowing whether the victim is remembering the assailant or the picture.
Another interesting fact about
memory is that studies have shown that there is no significant correlation between the subjective feeling of certainty
a person has about a memory and the memory being accurate. Also, contrary to what many people believe, hypnosis does not aid memory's accuracy. Because subjects are extremely suggestible while
hypnotized, most states do not allow as evidence in a court of law testimony made while under hypnosis (Loftus, 1979).
Furthermore, it is possible
to create false memories in people's minds by suggestion, even false memories of previous lives. Memory is so malleable that we should be very cautious in claiming certainty
about any given memory without corroborative evidence.
How does memory work?
We do not know exactly how
memory works, though there are many explanatory models for memory. Some of these models identify memory with brain functions.
On this model, for example, memory diminishes with age because neurons die off as we get older. There are only three ways
to overcome this fact of nature: 1. figure out a way to stop neurons from dying; 2. figure out a way to stimulate the growth
of new neurons; or 3. figure out a way to get the remaining neurons to function more efficiently and pick up the slack. So
far, it looks like options 2 and 3 are the most promising. Some positive results have been reported regarding the stimulation
of the growth of new brain cells by fetal implants. Fred Gage of The Salk Institute has reported that recent research in neurogenesis is encouraging. They have observed
the growth of neurons in the dentate gyrus, a portion of the hippocampus (which controls learning and short term memory),
in mice that were placed in a stimulating environment. Gage has also grafted immature cells from the spinal cord to the hippocampus
and found that they produced new neuronal cells. There is also growing support for the notion that exercising the body and
the brain tend to preserve neurons. "Use it or lose it" turns out to be literally true for brain cells.
Neurological research has also
produced some success getting neurons to work better with ampakines, chemical compounds sometimes called "memory drugs."
The first tests with humans showed excellent results, but the samples were too small to justify drawing any conclusion except
that more studies are needed.
For those who think that memory is a function of
some non-physical reality, such results should cause some reflection, though I doubt that a non-physical model of the mind
will lead to any significant research which will benefit humankind. For those who posit that memory is a brain function, there
is not only a direction for research to follow, but hope of success for discovering something truly useful.
See related entries on Bridie Murphy, dianetics, hypnosis, false memory, mind, reincarnation, repressed memory, and repressed memory therapy.
further reading
Ashcraft, Mark H. Human Memory and Cognition (Addison-Wesley
Pub Co., 1994).
Baddeley, Alan D. Human Memory: Theory and Practice
(Allyn & Bacon, 1998).
Baker, Robert A. Hidden Memories: Voices and Visions From
Within (Buffalo, N.Y. : Prometheus Books, 1996).
Kandel, Eric R. & James H. Schwartz, eds. Principles
of Neural Science 4th ed. (McGraw-Hill Professional Publishing, 2000).
Loftus, Elizabeth F. Memory, Surprising New
Insights Into How We Remember and Why We Forget (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., 1980).
Loftus, Elizabeth F. Eyewitness Testimony (Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1979).
Loftus, Elizabeth and Katherine Ketcham. Witness for the
Defense : The Accused, the Eyewitness, and the Expert Who Puts Memory on Trial (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1991).
Pinker, Steven. How the Mind Works (W.W. Norton &
Company, 1999).
Schacter, Daniel L., editor, Memory Distortion: How Minds,
Brains, and Societies Reconstruct the Past (harvard University Press, 1997).
Schacter, Daniel L. Searching for Memory - the brain, the
mind, and the past (New York: Basic Books, 1996).
Schacter, Daniel L. The Seven Sins of Memory : How the
Mind Forgets and Remembers (Houghton Mifflin Co., 2001).
Tavris, Carol. "Hysteria and the incest-survivor
machine," Sacramento Bee, Forum section, January 17, 1993
false memories
A false memory is a memory
which is a distortion of an actual experience, or a confabulation of an imagined one. Many false memories involve confusing or mixing fragments
of memory events, some of which may have happened at different times but which are remembered as occurring together. Many
false memories involve an error in source memory. Some involve treating dreams as if they were playbacks of real experiences. Still other false memories are
believed to be the result of the prodding, leading, and suggestions of therapists and counselors. Finally, Dr. Elizabeth Loftus has shown not only that it is possible to implant false memories, but that it
is relatively easy to do so (Loftus, 1994).
A memory of your mother throwing
a glass of milk on your father when in fact it was your father who threw the milk is a false memory based upon an actual experience.
You may remember the event vividly and be able to "see" the action clearly, but only corroboration by those present can determine
whether your memory of the event is accurate. Distortions such as switching the roles of people in one's memory are quite
common. Some distortions are quite dramatic, such as the following examples of false memories due to confusion about the source
of the memory.
A woman accused memory expert
Dr. Donald Thompson of having raped her. Thompson was doing a live interview for a television program just before the rape
occurred. The woman had seen the program and "apparently confused her memory of him from the television screen with her memory
of the rapist" (Schacter, 1996, 114).
Jean Piaget, the great child psychologist, claimed
that his earliest memory was of nearly being kidnapped at the age of 2. He remembered details such as sitting in his baby
carriage, watching the nurse defend herself against the kidnapper, scratches on the nurse's face, and a police officer with
a short cloak and a white baton chasing the kidnapper away. The story was reinforced by the nurse and the family and others
who had heard the story. Piaget was convinced that he remembered the event. However, it never happened. Thirteen years after
the alleged kidnapping attempt, Piaget's former nurse wrote to his parents to confess that she had made up the entire story.
Piaget later wrote: "I therefore must have heard, as a child, the account of this story...and projected it into the past in
the form of a visual memory, which was a memory of a memory, but false" (Tavris).
Remembering being kidnapped when you were an infant
(under the age of three) is a false memory, almost by definition. The left inferior prefrontal lobe is undeveloped in infants,
but is required for long-term memory. The elaborate encoding required for classifying and remembering such an event
cannot occur in the infant's brain.
The brains of infants and very
young children are capable of storing fragmented memories, however. Fragmented memories can be disturbing in adults.
Schacter notes the case of a rape victim who could not remember the rape, which took place on a brick pathway. The words brick
and path kept popping into her mind, but she did not connect them to the rape. She became very upset when taken
back to the scene of the rape, though she didn't remember what had happened there (Schacter 1996, 232). Whether a fragmented
memory of infant abuse can cause significant psychological damage in the adult has not been scientifically established, though
it seems to be widely believed by many psychotherapists.
What is also widely believed
by many psychotherapists is that many psychological disorders and problems are due to the repression of memories of childhood sexual abuse. On the other hand, many psychologists
maintain that their colleagues doing repressed memory therapy (RMT) are encouraging, prodding, and suggesting false memories of abuse to their
patients. Many of the recovered memories are of being sexually abused by parents, grandparents, and ministers. Many of those
accused claim the memories are false and have sued therapists for their alleged role in creating false memories.
It is as unlikely that all
recovered memories of childhood sexual abuse are false as that they are all true. What is known about memory makes it especially difficult to sort out true from distorted or false recollections.
However, some consideration should be given to the fact that certain brain processes are necessary for any memories to occur.
Thus, memories of infant abuse or of abuse that took place while one was unconscious are unlikely to be accurate. Memories
that have been directed by dreams or hypnosis are notoriously unreliable. Dreams are not usually direct playbacks of experience.
Furthermore, the data of dreams is generally ambiguous. Hypnosis and other techniques that ply upon a person’s suggestibility
must be used with great caution lest one create memories by suggestion rather than pry them loose by careful questioning.
Furthermore, memories are often mixed; some parts
are accurate and some are not. Separating the two can be a chore under ordinary circumstances. A woman might have consciously
repressed childhood sexual abuse by a neighbor or relative. Some experience in adulthood may serve as a retrieval cue and
she remembers the abuse. This disturbs her and disturbs her dreams. She has nightmares, but now it is her father or grandfather
or priest who is abusing her. She enters RMT and within a few months she recalls vividly how her father, mother, grandfather,
grandmother, priest, etc., not only sexually abused her but engaged in horrific satanic rituals involving human sacrifices and cannibalism. Where does the truth lie? The patient's
memories are real and horrible, even if false. The patient's suffering is real whether the memories are true or false. And
families are destroyed whether the memories are true or false.
Should such memories be taken
at face value and accepted as true without any attempt to prove otherwise? Obviously it would be unconscionable to ignore
accusations of sexual abuse. Likewise, it is unconscionable to be willing to see lives and families destroyed without at least
trying to find out if any part of the memories of sexual abuse are false. It also seems inhumane to encourage patients to
recall memories of sexual abuse (or of being abducted by aliens) unless one has a very good reason for doing so. Assuming all or most emotional
problems are due to repressed memories of childhood sexual abuse is not a good enough reason to risk harming a patient by
encouraging delusional beliefs and damaging familial relationships. Assuming that if you can't disprove that a patient was
abducted by aliens, then he probably was, is not a good enough reason. A responsible therapist has a duty to help a patient
sort out delusion from reality, dreams and confabulations from truth, and real abuse from imagined abuse. If good therapy
means the encouragement of delusion as standard procedure, then good therapy may not always be worth it.
Finally, those who find that
it is their duty to determine whether a person has been sexually abused or whether a memory of such abuse is a false memory,
should be well versed in the current scientific literature regarding memory. They should know that all of us are pliable and
suggestible to some degree, but that children are especially vulnerable to suggestive and leading questioning. They should
also remember that children are highly imaginative and that just because a child says he or she remembers something does not
mean that he or she does. However, when children say they do not remember something, to keep questioning them until
they do remember it, is not good interrogation.
Investigators, counselors, and therapists should
also remind themselves that many charges and memories are heavily influenced by media coverage. People charged with or convicted
of crimes have noticed that their chances of gaining sympathy increase if others believe they were abused as children. People
with grudges have also noticed that nothing can destroy another person so quickly as being charged with sexual abuse, while
at the same time providing the accuser with sympathy and comfort. Emotionally disturbed people are also influenced by what
they read, see, or hear in the mass media, including stories of repressed abuse as the cause of emotional problems. An emotionally
disturbed adult may accuse another adult of abusing a child, not because there is good evidence of abuse, but because the
disturbed person imagines or fears abuse. In short, investigators should not rush to judgment.
See related entries on : Bridie Murphy, dianetics, hypnosis, memory, mind, multiple personality disorder, repressed memory, repressed memory therapy, and the unconscious.
further reading
reader comments
Baker, Robert A. Hidden Memories: Voices and Visions From
Within (Buffalo, N.Y. : Prometheus Books, 1992.)
Cooper, Claire, "Repressed-memory lawsuits
spur backlash from accused,"The Sacramento Bee, March 18, 1993, p. B4.
de Rivera, Joseph, "'Trauma searches' plant the
seed of imagined misery," The Sacramento Bee, May 18, 1993.
Johnston, Moira. Spectral Evidence: The Ramona Case: Incest,
Memory, and Truth on Trial in Napa Valley (Westview Press, 1999).
Loftus, Elizabeth F. Memory, Surprising New
Insights Into How We Remember and Why We Forget (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., 1980).
Loftus, Elizabeth. The Myth of Repressed Memory (New
York: St. Martin's, 1994).
McNally, Richard. Remembering Trauma (Belknap 2003).
Ofshe, Richard and Ethan Watters. Making Monsters: False
Memories, Psychotherapy, and Sexual Hysteria (New York: Scribner's, 1994).
Sacks, Oliver W. An anthropologist on Mars : seven paradoxical
tales (New York : Knopf, 1995).
Schacter, Daniel L., editor, Memory Distortion: How Minds,
Brains, and Societies Reconstruct the Past (Harvard University Press, 1997).
Schacter, Daniel L. Searching for Memory - the brain, the
mind, and the past (New York: Basic Books, 1996).
Schacter, Daniel L. The Seven Sins of Memory : How the
Mind Forgets and Remembers (Houghton Mifflin Co., 2001).
Tavris, Carol. "Hysteria and the incest-survivor
machine," Sacramento Bee, Forum section, January 17, 1993.
|
