|

By Jim Hopper, Ph.D.
(last revised 3/28/2011)
kw: repressed false memory syndrome;
repressed false memory syndrome; repressed false memory syndrome;
child abuse, child abuse
Amnesia for childhood sexual abuse is a condition.
The existence of this condition is beyond dispute.
Repression is merely one explanation
often a confusing and misleading one
for what causes the condition of amnesia.
Some people sexually abused in childhood
will have periods of amnesia for their abuse,
followed by experiences of delayed recall.
(Based on published research. See below.)
Notes on Usage & Presentation
This is a very large individual Web page (over 50 printed pages). Please
be patient as it loads. For your convenience, I suggest that
you begin by checking out the Table of Contents, then scrolling
down to read the Preface, Words of Caution, and Introduction. If you
try to follow links in the Table of Contents before the page has fully
loaded, you will have to reload it.
I have highlighted in red those passages which
particularly fit with my goals. These do not correspond
to emphases in the original texts. Again, this is a very large
page, and the highlights can be used for browsing too.
Table of Contents
Preface - Author Info. & Aims for this Page
Words of Caution I - Caveats on Research Evidence, Theory
& Controversy
Words of Caution II - Personal Concerns & Questions About Your Memories?
Introduction: Empirical Evidence, Psychological Constructs
& Scientific Progress
Hypertext Table of Research Findings
- Perfect for Fast Browsing!
The Journal of Psychiatry and Law - 1996 Review; Perpetrator Confessions
Linda Meyer Williams - Great Research (prospective, community sample)
Cathy Spatz Widom - Great Research (prospective, large sample, gender effects)
Diana Elliott - Great Research (random national sample, various traumas)
Bessel van der Kolk - Traumatic Memories & Dissociation; 4 Papers on Web
Judith Lewis Herman - Verified Memories; Social Contexts; Dissociation
Ross Cheit - Recovered Memory Project Archive of Corroborated Cases
Elizabeth Loftus - What the Popular Media Haven't Reported
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition
- Dissociative Amnesia is an Established Psychiatric Diagnosis
Journal of Traumatic Stress - Special Issue: Traumatic Memory Research
John Briere - Two Research Studies
Shirley Feldman-Summers - Study of Therapists; Verified Memories
Jennifer Freyd - Betrayal of Children & Memory Loss
Chris Brewin - Explanations Based on Cognitive Science
Cynthia Bowman & Elizabeth Mertz - Legal Argument & Scientific Review
Judge Edward Harrington, U.S. District Court - Recovered Memory Ruling
Selected Books on Recovered & Traumatic Memories
Media Coverage of Recovered Memories - Sources of Bias & Deceptiveness
Additional Resources - Including Articles & Web Resources
Related Pages at This Site
Contents
Preface
I am a researcher and therapist with a doctorate (Ph.D.) in clinical psychology. I am a licensed clinical psychologist, and for nearly 20 years
I have been a therapist to men and women abused in childhood, providing individual and group treatment. I have studied
the characteristics of traumatic memories and the effects of psychological trauma on biological systems involved in emotion regulation.
My collaborators include Dr. Bessel van der Kolk, a leader in the psychological trauma field at The Trauma Center and Boston University.
I am an independent consultant, Clinical Instructor in Psychology at Harvard Medical School, and consultant on psychological trauma at the Outpatient Addictions Service of the Cambridge Health Alliance.
The contents of this page reflect my level of experience and expertise, as well as opinions I have formed over the years.
I have published this page to direct
people to quality scholarly work on traumatic memory, especially:
- Research evidence showing that it is NOT RARE for people who were
sexually abused in childhood to experience amnesia and delayed
recall for the abuse. This body of work shows that claims to the
contrary are contradicted by scientific evidence.
- Research and theoretical works by qualified specialists who
increasingly agree that: a) traumatic and nontraumatic memories have
some different characteristics; b) the construct of "dissociation" best
explains many traumatic memories, e.g., those involving fragmentary
sensations and feelings which are disconnected from verbal narratives,
and associated with amnesia and delayed recall. These
works show that making claims about traumatic memory based on
generalizations from research on nontraumatic memory, and focusing
on the constructs of "repression" and "repressed memory," can often
be confusing distractions and misleading tactics.
To accomplish these two goals, this page does not need to be
comprehensive, nor up-to-date on the latest research - though I will occassionally
make additions, and am always open to suggestions.
Before proceeding, I want to acknowledge some very
important issues that this page, with its limited goals related
to recovered memories and dissociation, does not address, except in passing. Please
read every item and the entire list very carefully.
Issues not addressed on this page:
- Every instance of recall is a process of reconstruction,
and therefore involves some degree of distortion.
- This process of reconstruction is never random, and is always
influenced by factors internal and external to the person attempting
accurate recall.
- There is strong evidence that people can sincerely believe they
have recovered a memory or memories of abuse by a particular person,
but actually be mistaken.
- There is strong evidence that such memories have led to accusations
about particular events that never happened and accusations of people
who never committed such acts.
- In some cases mistaken memories and accusations have caused
extraordinary pain and damage to individuals and families.
- One of the preventable causes of these tragedies is incompetence
by therapists, who sometimes contribute to the creation of false
memories and/or believe them without good reason.
- Currently, there are no reliable statistics on the occurences
listed as numbers 3 through 6 above. Along these lines, see two articles
by Dr. Kenneth Pope: "Questioning Claims About the False Memory Syndrome
Epidemic," and "Science as Careful Questioning: Are Claims of a False
Memory Syndrome Epidemic Based on Empirical Evidence?" (For more information
about these articles and online ordering of copies, follow the
link to Pope's site in the "Additional Resources" section of this page.)
- Most of these issues are addressed at the Web site of
the False Memory Syndrome Foundation. I do not endorse that organization,
their Web site, nor their treatment of these issues, which is clearly
extreme in many ways. But I do encourage you to consider all positions,
to contrast what you learn here with the materials presented at the FMSF
site, and to come to your own conclusions.
Finally, I strongly encourage you to seek out and read some of
the scholarly works cited below. These will help you to make your own
judgements rather than relying on what you hear or read in the popular
media, or what is available on the Internet including this page. It is
my aim and hope, however, that reading this page will give you powerful
knowledge and tools for thinking more critically about whatever else
you hear and read on this topic.
Contents
Words of Caution I
- Research and theories about amnesia and delayed
recall for childhood sexual abuse are extremely controversial.
- All statistics and interpretations of these phenomena are disputed
by some experts.
- Complex and subtle scientific issues are involved, including
criticisms of research methods and theory-based interpretations of
research findings and clinical observations.
- The most controversial issues are:
- How common are amnesia and delayed recall for sexual abuse
experiences?
- How do we understand the evidence? For example, do people
"simply forget" sexual abuse just as they might temporarily
forget any other unpleasant experience, or are different brain mechanisms
and psychological defensive processes involved?
- Emotions and moral commitments influence everyone's
reasoning and judgement to some extent.
- Even experts who claim to be without bias are fooling themselves
or trying to fool you.
- The presentation of research, statistics and theories on this page
is influenced by my values, my informed opinions, and my experiences
as a therapist and researcher over the past 20 years.
Contents
Words of Caution II - Personal Concerns & Questions
You may be reading this page to gain better understanding of your own memories,
or lack of memories of (suspected) sexual abuse in childhood. Or you may have questions about whether remembering child abuse
experiences can improve your life. If so, please take the time to read this entire
section (about three printed pages). At its end I suggest a book with effective tools for
managing painful and unpredictable memories, and link to more information on the stages of recovery and how to find professional help.
For those who find this section particularly helpful, it can be downloaded as a PDF file, for easier printing.
- People who read this web page sometimes have questions like these:
- "How can I recover (more) memories?"
- "How can I find someone to hypnotize me?"
- "How can I know for sure whether I was abused?"
- It is natural that people ask these questions, particularly given how the
popular media present these issues.
- It is more helpful, however, to step back and look at the bigger picture. . .
- "Why do I want to recover (more) memories?"
- "What do I hope that recovering memories will do for me?"
- "Why do I wish I could know for sure whether I was abused?"
- "What problems and suffering in my life now do I believe will be changed
by remembering abuse?"
- These are extremely important questions. They go to the heart of who you are,
your deepest hopes, and your current struggles. There are no right or wrong answers.
The point is that, first, you need to better understand your current problems, and
to clarify what you want to achieve for yourself and your life. This must come before
learning about whether recovering memories might be helpful.
- Who knows, maybe recovering memories could help you. But this is not the
key to healing the effects of child abuse and having a better life, and what you
hope to gain by recovering memories is usually better achieved in other ways.
- Remembering how you got through painful experiences, with whatever strengths and
resources you had at the time, is usually much more helpful than remembering
details of abuse. This is understood by the experts on these issues, and by any
therapist qualified to help people heal from painful childhoods.
- Healing from the effects of abuse is a process that takes place in stages,
and the point of the first stage is not about recovering memories, or even focusing on the
contents of the memories you already have.
- The first stage of healing and recovery, and any helpful therapy or counseling,
is about:
- Getting a "road map" of the healing process, including the possible stages and
the most helpful approaches to memories at each stage.
- Establishing safety and stability in your body, your relationships, and the rest of your life.
- Tapping into and developing your own inner strengths and all the resources potentially available to you.
- Learning how to regulate your emotions and manage symptoms that make you feel unsafe or cause suffering.
- Developing and strengthening skills for managing painful memories and other experiences,
and minimizing unhelpful responses.
- Of course, everything is not always so perfectly ordered and sequential. During
the first stage of recovery, it may be necessary to discuss the contents of memories that are
disrupting your life. This may be required, for example, to help you manage them, or to understand
why you find it is hard to care for yourself (the abuser communicated that you were
unworthy of care or love, etc.). However, in this case addressing memories
is not the focus of therapy, but a means to achieving safety, stability and greater
ability to take care of yourself.
- Therefore, here are two more important questions that you need to answer,
which will require more research and, in most cases, consultation with a qualified professional:
- "What must I learn before discussing or "working through" abuse memories could
help to improve my current life and help me achieve future goals?"
- "What skills and capacities must I develop to manage the memories I already
have - so that I can make sense of them or address any new memories that might emerge?"
- Only after establishing a solid foundation of understanding, self-regulation skills, and
safety and stability in one's life should one decide - freely, thoughtfully, mindful of
the dangers - whether or not to focus on memories of
abuse in order to, for example, place them into a larger understanding of one's life
and identity. In fact, once such a foundation is in place, some people realize that
thinking and talking about their abuse memories is not necessary to achieve their
life goals, and that those memories are no longer of interest to them. (And sometimes
people need to educate their therapists about this!)
- For those who do need to focus on abuse memories, or decide that this could be
helpful, making sense of what happened and how it fits into one's life story is
part of a second stage of recovery, sometimes referred to as "remembrance
and mourning." ("Mourning" refers to working through grief about the remembered
abuse and its negative effects, grief about good experiences one didn't have and,
for some, grief about not even being able to remember important experiences. However,
this may not be necessary either.)
- It is true that, for some people, focusing on the contents of abuse memories,
including recovered memories, can be part of a second stage of the healing process.
(Again, for some people this may not be necessary and may not be something they
are interested in doing.) For those who do choose to explore their memories,
several important cautionary points should be kept in mind:
- If abuse memories do not emerge spontaneously, this may be due to healthy
and protective psychological "defense mechanisms."
- "Digging for memories," or trying to force abuse memories to emerge, is
almost never a helpful approach, and can cause a great deal of harm. This can cause increased
distress and confusion, and behaviors that are harmful to oneself and important
relationships (including false memories and mistaken accusations).
- Attempting to recover abuse memories using hypnosis or other mind-altering techniques
is almost never a good idea. The risk of creating very distorted or outright false memories
is increased by such methods.
- Even focusing on abuse memories one already has, without proper
preparation, will almost always increase distress, instability and self-destructiveness.
- Though new memories may emerge during the course of therapy, and managing and making
sense of such memories can be part of the healing process, recovering memories
of abuse should never be the focus, or even a goal, of therapy or counseling.
- Finally, here are a few more things to consider:
- No matter how much abuse someone has experienced, or how complete her or his
memories are, there is always much more to that person than "abuse victim" or "abuse survivor."
- There is a danger of constructing a personal identity, or reinforcing a sense
of self, that is too identified with, too constricted by, and too focused on being
a "victim" or "survivor."
- Intellectual learning, therapy, and many other activities and relationships
can help people heal from harmful effects of child abuse, including help people deal with
troubling memories. But if improving of one's current life and creating a better future
take a back seat to exploring the past, healing will be slowed down, and may even be prevented.
If you want to start learning and practicing the self-regulation skills essential to dealing with traumatic memories and the first stage
of recovery, I strongly recommend this book:
Growing
Beyond Survival: A Self-Help Toolkit for Managing Traumatic Stress, by Elizabeth Vermilyea.
To learn more and/or order it directly from the publisher (for a higher price than Amazon), go to the
Growing Beyond Survival page
of the Sidran Press catalog.
To learn more about the potential stages of recovery from traumatic child abuse, and how to find competent professional help, see the About Recovery & Therapy section of my Child Abuse web page
If you found this section particularly helpful, you can download it as a PDF file, for easy printing.
Contents
Introduction:
Empirical Evidence, Psychological Constructs & Scientific Progress
Reading this brief introduction will make it
much easier to benefit from the rest of the information on this
page.
Empirical Evidence
Physical evidence of assaults, corroboration from
witnesses, and confessions by perpetrators are empirical evidence.
When it comes to research on recovered child abuse memories, there IS
empirical evidence of this kind, though a lot less than of the next type. . .
The things people say about their abuse memories,
including how they respond to researchers' questions these are empirical
evidence too. Of course, these kinds of data are not necessarily
about objective events, nor conclusive evidence that abuse occurred. But
they are the only evidence we have
about people's memories for abuse experiences (real,
imagined, or some mixture of the two).
Both of these forms of evidence are
extremely important, and people on all sides of the recovered
memories debate acknowledge that what people say about their memories is
one kind of empirical evidence, and one worth researching (whether or not
a person has physical proof or corroboration from others).
Theoretical Constructs
Scientists try to understand and explain
empirical evidence by using theoretical constructs,
that is, ideas devised to integrate systematically a group of related
observations or phenomena in a useful way.
Constructs should not be confused with empirical
evidence. Constructs should not be considered actual things, events,
processes, or experiences. Rather, constructs are
conceptual tools. They are conceptual tools that
focus our attention on certain things, events, processes, and
experiences and help us try to make sense of them. But every construct
directs our attention away from certain phenomena too, and can
make it harder for us to notice and understand some empirical
evidence.
Therefore, when we are dealing with complex phenomena which we do not
fully understand like memories of child abuse we must not get too
attached to any one construct whether it's "forgetting," "amnesia,"
"repression" or "dissociation." Otherwise we'll surely overlook important
data, and fool ourselves into thinking we understand when we don't.
Just as important, before drawing firm conclusions about a controversial
issue like recovered memories we should be familiar with the various
constructs used to describe and explain the empirical evidence including
constructs used by those who have studied it the most. Otherwise we leave
ourselves highly vulnerable to being confused and misled.
Child Abuse Memories:
Empirical Evidence, Psychological Constructs & Scientific
Progress
It is not rare for people to say they don't remember an abuse experience
that actually happened.
It is not rare for people to report that there were times when they
didn't remember an abuse experience that they remember now.
When people say these things, we try to describe
and explain what they are reporting with psychological
constructs:
- "forgetting"
- "amnesia"
- "repression"
- "dissociation"
Four crucial points:
- "Amnesia" is a descriptive construct. It directs our attention to
the condition of being unable to remember experiences like childhood sexual
abuse.
- "Repression" and "dissociation" are explanatory constructs. They
point to hypothesized psychological mechanisms that may be responsible for
the condition of amnesia.
- All constructs exist on a continuum from descriptive
to explanatory. When it comes to empirical evidence of traumatic and recovered
memories, dissociation is more descriptive of more empirical evidence than
is repression.
- The persistence and the accuracy of a memory are completely
separate issues, and not keeping them separate as constructs leads to considerable
confusion. People can have memories that are largely true or largely false whether or
not those memories have been recovered or continuously available. Thus it is very
misleading to discuss "recovered versus false memories of abuse" or present these as mutually exclusive categories.
It is not rare for people to say that at some point they came to remember
a past abuse experience which they had not previously remembered.
When people say things along these lines, again we
use psychological constructs as we strive to describe and explain
what happened to them:
- "He remembered."
- "She recovered a memory."
- "Before beginning therapy, the patient experienced delayed recall."
- "Some research subjects had a return of previously repressed memories."
- "Some subjects in the study made new associative linkages among
dissociated memory fragments, and integrated these with their
conscious, verbal and narrative autobiographical memories."
In short, we use psychological
constructs to describe and explain people's inabilities to
remember and their recovered memories of child abuse which are far too varied and
complex to be captured by any one construct alone. And we use separate constructs to describe
memories on a continuum from continuous to recovered, and a continuum from accurate to inaccurate.
As noted above, no matter which constructs we use, we should never confuse
constructs with empirical evidence. And no matter which constructs we
prefer, this does not change the empirical evidence we already have
(though our constructs can influence our interpretations of it). Finally,
better constructs lead to better research questions and methods, better empirical
evidence, better interpretations of evidence and still-better
constructs. . . That's the self-perpetuating process of scientific
progress, of course.
This Web page documents scientific
progress by those who study child abuse memories:
- A substantial body of empirical evidence of amnesia and delayed
recall for abuse has existed for years.
- Significant progress has occurred in how such empirical evidence is described and explained in
ways that do not confuse and mislead people, particularly in shifting from "repression" to more descriptive
constructs like dissociation and explanatory constructs from cognitive science and neuroscience.
Contents
Hypertext Table of Research
Findings
Amnesia and delayed recall for sexual abuse experiences are NOT rare. This table presents published research
studies on whether some people with histories of child sexual abuse experience periods of amnesia and delayed recall.
This is a HYPERTEXT table: Click on authors' names to go directly to abstracts of their studies; then click on your
browser's "Back" button to come back to the table.
Methodological notes:
1) Data from "community" samples are more representative than data from "clinical" samples; community samples represent
the general population, while clinical ones represent people in mental health treatment. 2) "Prospective" studies are better
than "retrospective" ones; in the former, researchers follow and later question confirmed people with abuse histories, while the latter rely on subjects'
reports of past abuse. 3) Each of these studies has some methodological flaws or limitations, but their relative consistency strongly suggests that
these findings are not spurious.
A note on this table's limited scope:
The table below presents only a small selection of studies.
As early as 1997, Scheflin and Brown's review of the scientific
research on recovered memories of sexual abuse (see next section) could present
a table of 25 studies every single one of which found periods of total
and/or partial amnesia in a subpopulation of people with histories of
sexual abuse.
|
Selected Studies of Amnesia and Delayed Recall for Experiences
of Childhood Sexual Abuse |
Author(s) & Date of Study |
Type of Sample |
Nature of Data Collection |
# of Subjects With Abuse or Trauma Histories |
% With a Period of Possible Amnesia (some with delayed recall) |
| Go to
abstracts from authors' names - Use browser "Back" button to return |
Partial |
Total |
| Elliott (1997) |
Community
(random national) |
Retrospective |
357
(variety of traumas) |
17 |
15 |
| Williams (1995) |
Community |
Prospective
(abuse documented 17 years earlier) |
75* |
NA |
16* |
| Widom & Morris (1997) |
Community (social services) |
Prospective
(abuse documented 20 years earlier) |
96 |
NA |
Females: 32 Males: 58** |
| Elliott & Briere (1995) |
Community (random) |
Retrospective |
116 |
22 |
20 |
| Loftus, Polonsky, & Fullilove (1994) |
Clinical |
Retrospective |
52 |
12 |
19 |
| Feldman-Summers & Pope (1994) |
Community (therapists) |
Retrospective |
79
(sexual and/or physical abuse) |
40.5
(not distinguished) |
| Briere & Conte (1993) |
Clinical |
Retrospective |
450 |
NA |
59.3 |
| Herman & Schatzow (1987) |
Clinical |
Retrospective |
53 |
64 (not
distinguished) |
* There were 129 subjects with documented
sexual abuse incidents, but 42 (38%) did not report those experiences, and it was concluded that some of those subjects actually did not remember (see Williams, Study 1, below). Clearly, some of
those subjects might experience delayed recall later, which would suggest that the the 16% figure is an underestimate. (Also, 5 of the 80 who did
remember were inadvertently not asked about whether they had ever
experienced amnesia for the documented abuse incident.)
** As discussed in the paper, it is highly unlikely that all subjects who did not report sexual abuse (despite it being substantiated in childhood) simply did not remember that the events had occurred. Instead, as in all such studies, some percentage did not report prior abuse for other reasons including unwillingness to disclose the information to researchers, current interpretations of those experiences as not abusive, etc. and it appears these influences are greater for males than females.
Contents
The Journal of Psychiatry and Law
Special Issue on Recovered Memories of Sexual Abuse
The Summer 1996 volume of The Journal of Psychiatry
and Law, published in February of 1997, is an indispensable resource. Its
six articles include Scheflin and Brown's comprehensive review
of scientific studies of recovered memories of sexual abuse, and Dalenberg's
study of the accuracy of sexual abuse memories recovered in psychotherapy
(she actually conducted interviews with both victims and perpetrators, some
of whom confessed). Directions for ordering this special issue, as
well as the Fall 1995 special issue that focused on claims of false memories,
are at the end of this section.
Brown, D., & Scheflin, A. W. Editors' Page.
Excerpt:
"The Fall 1995 issue of The Journal of Psychiatry and Law
was a special issue on the false-memory controversy. It contained a
number of papers originally given at a 1994 conference at Johns Hopkins
University sponsored by the False Memory Syndrome Foundation. These
papers represented only one side of the complex issues involved in
the false-memory controversy. We appreciate the gracious invitation of
Howard Nashel, editor-in-chief of this journal, to serve as guest
editors to prepare a second issue that is representative of the work
in the trauma field in response to false-memory claims. Our hope is
that the readers of this journal will consider the Fall 1995 issue along
with this Summer 1996 issue as a unit in order to get a more balanced
overview of the controversy (p.139).
". . . . Taken as a whole, these six articles
demonstrate that false-memory claims need to be made much more cautiously,
especially in courts and in the media, as recent databased studies have
either failed to support important false-memory claims or have shown that
these claims have been overstated. Most importantly, the science of
memory must be permitted to continue untainted by ideological
considerations. The false-memory controversy must be converted from
a political debate to a scientific inquiry. It is our hope that this
issue of The Journal of Psychiatry and Law will help accomplish
that goal."
Scheflin, A. W., & Brown, D. Repressed memory or dissociative amnesia:
What the science says.
Abstract: "Legal actions of alleged abuse
victims based on recovered memories of childhood sexual abuse (CSA) have been
challenged arguing that the concept of repressed memories does not meet a
generally accepted standard of science. A recent review of the scientific
literature on amnesia for CSA concluded that the evidence was insufficient.
The issues revolve around: (1) the existence of amnesia for CSA, and (2) the
accuracy of recovered memories. A total of 25 studies
on amnesia for CSA now exist, all of which demonstrate amnesia in a subpopulation;
no study failed to find it, including recent studies with design improvements
such as random sampling and prospective designs that address
weaknesses in earlier studies. A reasonable conclusion is that amnesia for
CSA is a robust finding across studies using very different samples and
methods of assessment. Studies addressing the accuracy of memories show
that recovered memories are no more or no less accurate than continuous
memories for abuse.
Excerpts: "Even more significantly, no study has surfaced that refutes
the dissociative amnesia hypothesis by failing to get reports of inability
to voluntarily recall repeated childhood abuse (pp.145-146).
"Most scientific
studies can be criticized for methodological weaknesses, but such design
limitations should not obscure the fact that the data reported across
every one of the 25 studies demonstrate that either partial or
full abuse-specific amnesia, either for single incidents of childhood
sexual abuse or across multiple incidents of childhood sexual abuse, is
a robust finding. Partial or full amnesia was found across studies
regardless of whether the sample was clinical, nonclinical, random or
non-random, or whether the study was retrospective or prospective. Every
known study has found amnesia for childhood sexual abuse in at least a
portion of the sampled individuals (pp.178-179, italics in original).
"These studies, when placed together, meet
the test of science namely, that the finding holds up across quite a
number of independent experiments, each with different samples, each
assessing the target variables in a variety of different ways, and each
arriving at a similar conclusion. When multiple samples and multiple
sampling methods are used, the error rate across studies is reduced. Even
where a small portion of these cases of reported amnesia may be associated
with abuse that may not have occurred or at least could not be substantiated, the great preponderance of the
evidence strongly suggests that at least some subpopulation of sexually
abused survivors experiences a period of full or partial amnesia for the
abuse. Moreover, a significant portion of these amnestic subjects, at
least in some of the studies, later acquired some form of corroboration
of the abuse (p.179).
"Furthermore these 25 studies. . .
illustrate how scientific inquiry evolves, in the best sense. The earliest
clinical surveys were appropriately criticized on the grounds of possible
sample and experimenter bias. Perhaps those reporting amnesia represented
a highly select group of patients, or perhaps their report of recovered
memories was influenced, or even 'implanted,' by the therapist-experimenters.
Nonclinical samples began to appear as a way to address the sample bias
problem. A number of subsequent studies clearly demonstrated that
psychotherapy was not frequently endorsed as the reason
for recovery of memories, nor responsible for them. When the
nonclinical-sample experiments were criticized on the grounds of possible
selection bias, a number of random-sample studies appeared that addressed
this objection. All of the self-report studies were then criticized because
they allegedly lacked objective verification of the reported childhood
sexual abuse. In response to these criticisms, well-designed prospective
studies were conducted. These studies also document an inability to recall
a critical childhood abuse incident up to one or two decades after the
event in a subpopulation of sexually abused individuals. Not surprisingly,
the prospective studies were criticized for failure to include a
follow-up interview to distinguish between memory failure and memory
denial. However, these criticisms failed to take into consideration that
such an interview could not easily be conducted without introducing
response bias and other possible expectation and suggestive effects. The
prospective studies specifically attempted to reduce interviewing bias
and to approximate the conditions of free recall in the research design
because the memory error rate is minimized under the conditions of free
recall" (pp. 179 & 182, italics in original).
"These studies should have a direct impact on two significant and
currently volatile legal issues. First, courts holding a Frye
or Daubert evidentiary hearing involving expert or lay
testimony on the issue of whether 'repressed memory' is reliable must,
consistent with the science, hold either that such memories are
reliable or that all memory, repressed or otherwise, is unreliable. The
first solution is the wiser and better choice. Second, judges and
legislators deciding whether the delayed-discovery doctrine should be
applied to toll the statute of limitations in 'repressed' memory must
acknowledge that a class of sexual abuse victims with repressed memories
truly exists. The extent to which they are entitled to legal protection
is a legal question, not a scientific one. Some jurisdictions have
favored victims with 'repressed' memories; others have not. . . As a result
of these studies, no person should in the future be denied proper legal
consideration on the grounds that 'repressed' memory, as one judge
unscientifically stated, 'transcends human experience.'
"It appears that the repressed memory controversy will follow Arthur
Schopenhauer's wise observation: 'All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is
accepted as being self-evident'" (p.183, some references omitted).
Dalenberg, C. J. Accuracy, timing and circumstances of disclosure in
therapy of recovered and continuous memories of abuse.
Abstract: "Seventeen patients who had recovered memories
of abuse in therapy participated in a search for evidence confirming or
refuting these memories. Memories of abuse were found
to be equally accurate whether recovered or continuously remembered.
Predictors of number of memory units for which evidence was uncovered
included several measures of memory and perceptual accuracy. Recovered
memories that were later supported arose in psychotherapy more typically
during periods of positive rather than negative feelings toward the therapist,
and they were more likely to be held with confidence by the abuse victim."
Excerpts: "[I]n the present research the
author was able to substantiate the existence of the evidence offered
by the clients and to have this evidence rated for evidentiary value.
Further, both alleged victims and perpetrators participated in the
evidence collection, providing a better balance for the search for
confirming and refuting evidence (p.234).
"Both father and daughter participating
in locating 'evidence.' The evidence was of two types, primary and
contextual (p.242)
"Subjects were not significantly younger at the time of the event
relating to their first recovered memory (M = 5.53) than at
the time of their first reported continuous memory (M = 5.29;
t(16) = .48, ns). . . . Average confidence in the truth
of the memory before evidence was gathered was significantly lower
for recovered than for continuous memories (t(16) = 2.79,
p < .02).
"Of those memories for which some evidence was submitted (70% of all
memories), 74.6% of continuous and 74.7% of recovered memories were
judged by the full set of raters as having at least one piece of
Category 1 [primary] or Category 2 [contextual] support. Support for
the identity of the perpetrator was found for at least one recovered
memory for 10 subjects and for at least one of the continuous memories
for 12 subjects. . . At least one memory was supported by confession
in seven recovered memory cases and 10 continuous memory cases
(underline added).
"Overall there was no consistent pattern of subjects showing superior
recovered or continuous memory for abuse. However, four subjects had
significantly more evidence for accuracy of their recovered memory
(using the general abuse memory data), two showed significantly more
evidence for accuracy (and two for marginally more evidence) for
continuous memory, and nine were equal in amount of confirming
evidence. These individual differences might be worth further
exploration (pp.245-247).
"The likelihood of finding evidence of accuracy for
a recovered memory did relate to both timing and affective tone of
therapy. . . Seven subjects found significantly
more evidence for accuracy of memories reported during the last six
months of therapy than during the first three months, a pattern that
crossed recovered and continuous memories. . . Supported
recoveries were also more likely in the 'de-repression' sessions
(identified either by the presence of an alliance repair or the
presence of higher than average [top 12%] ratings of positive affect
toward the therapist). These sessions comprised 15% of the total
(p.250).
"An alternative method for expressing these data is in likelihood
ratios. As implied earlier, the ratio of supported to nonsupported
memories in this data set was approximately 3:1. The ratio drops to
2:1 in the negative-emotion or state-dependency sessions, but rises
to 14:1 in the alliance repair sessions (pp.250-251).
"Recovered and continuous memories also differed in the degree to
which they were associated with specific affective descriptions. . .
When affective terms were counted in the accounting
of each abuse episode, explicit statements regarding fear/terror and shame
were more likely to appear in recovered accounts, and sadness/loss/depression
was more likely to appear in continuous accounts. Considering the
episodes as independent units, the probability of fear/terror
mentioned (explicitly) in a recovered memory was .72 (compared with
.52 for continuous memories). Shame was mentioned explicitly in 54%
of the 57 recovered memory episodes and in 32% of the continuous memory
descriptions. Anger appeared equally in all memory types, and sadness
appeared more frequently for continuous memories (.67 compared with
.28). The difference in patterns (testing the most frequently named
emotion in each memory description) was significant (Chi Square
= 37.00, p < .001) (pp.251-252).
"Finally, on an exploratory note, 13 of the 17 subjects showed an
increase in the level of symptoms and 12 showed an increase in the
variance of symptoms. . . on their contemporaneous self-report
comparing the six weeks prior to the first recovery with the 12 weeks
following their first recovery. Resolution of symptoms typically
occurred by four to six months following recovery (p.252).
Olio, K. A. Are 25% of clinicians using potentially risky therapeutic
practices? A review of the logic and methodology of the Poole, Lindsay,
et al. study.
Abstract: "Conclusions from the Poole, Lindsay et al. study
are often cited to document claims regarding the frequency and potential
risks of using so-called suggestive memory recovery techniques or memory
recovery therapies. This study has also been used to document the alleged
number of persuaded clients who have developed false memories of
childhood abuse. The basis for these claims seems questionable when the
Poole, Lindsay et al. study is examined carefully. Lack of operational
definitions, flawed survey construction, lack of face validity,
misclassification of techniques, and fallacious inferences about
causality, such as mistaking correlation for causation, make it
impossible to use these data to draw scientific conclusions about the
nature and outcomes of clinicians' practices."
Roe, C. M., & Schwartz, M. F. Characteristics of previously forgotten
memories of sexual abuse: A descriptive study.
Abstract: "The present study is a first attempt to describe what people
remember when they initially recall childhood sexual abuse after a period
of self-reported amnesia for that abuse. Subjects were 52 white women
who had previously been hospitalized for treatment of sexual trauma.
Participants completed a questionnaire that inquired about their first
suspicions of having been sexually abused, their first memories of
sexual abuse, other memories of abuse, and details of their abuse
history. Participants were more likely to recall part of an abuse
episode, as opposed to an entire abuse episode, following a period of
no memory of the abuse. Additionally, first memories tended to be
described as vivid rather than vague. Descriptive statistics are used
to present and summarize additional findings."
Williams, M. R. Suits by adults for childhood sexual abuse: Legal
origins of the "repressed memory" controversy.
Abstract: "In the last decade there has been a proliferation
of civil lawsuits by adults claiming to be survivors of childhood sexual
abuse (CSA). Many states have permitted such suits to go forward by
applying some form of 'delayed discovery of injury' exception to the
statute of limitations. Advocates for those claiming to have been
falsely accused have generated a new concept 'false memory syndrome' as
an alternative explanation for delayed memories of CSA. Its proponents
claim that there is an epidemic of therapy-induced 'false memories' of CSA.
Psychotherapists and the profession as a whole have become involved in
a heated controversy, whose substance as well as intensity is to a
large extent litigation driven. To understand the controversy and get a
handle on its future, it is important to examine its legal origins,
history and context."
Hovdestad, W. E., & Kristiansen, C. M. A field study of "false
memory syndrome": Construct validity and incidence.
Abstract: "False memory syndrome (FMS) is described as a
serious form of psychopathology characterized by strongly believed
pseudomemories of childhood sexual abuse. A literature review
revealed four clusters of symptoms underlying the syndrome regarding
victims' belief in their memories of abuse and their identity as
survivors, their current interpersonal relationships, their trauma
symptoms across the lifespan, and the characteristics of their
therapy experiences. The validity of these clusters was examined
using data from a community sample of 113 women who identified
themselves as survivors of girlhood sexual abuse. Examining the
discriminant validity of these criteria revealed that participants
who had recovered memories of their abuse (n = 51), and who could
therefore potentially have FMS, generally did not differ from
participants with continuous memories (n = 49) on indicators of
these criteria. Correlational analyses also indicated that these
criteria typically failed to converge. Further, despite frequent
claims that FMS is occurring in epidemic proportions, only 3.9%-13.6%
of the women with a recovered memory satisfied the diagnostic criteria,
and women with continuous memories were equally unlikely to meet these
criteria. The implications of these findings for FMS theory and the
delayed-memory debate more generally are discussed."
To purchase a copy of this Summer 1996 issue and/or the Fall
1995 issue, send a letter or fax, including your name and address, and the complete name and volume (e.g., "The Journal
of Psychiatry and Law, Summer 1996") to:
Federal Legal Publications
39 Lakeview Road
Carmel, New york 10512
Fax: (845) 225-2686
You must pay in advance, with a check or credit card (card number, expiration date, and name as it appears on the card). Each volume is $35 plus $5 shipping and handling. If you
have questions, email flp@bestweb.net or call (845) 228-5086.
Contents
Linda Meyer Williams
University of New Hampshire
psychologist Linda Meyer Williams has conducted the best research to date
on amnesia and delayed recall for experiences of childhood sexual
abuse. The two papers below are essential reading for anyone who
seeks knowledge of the best available scientific evidence that people
experience amnesia and delayed recall for memories of abuse.
Both studies are part of a research project involving detailed
interviews with 129 women who, 17 years before, had been evaluated
in a hospital emergency room after being sexually abused.
Study 1
Williams found that for the documented incidents
of sexual abuse that had occurred 17 years earlier, one in three
women did not report those abuse experiences. In these interviews
the women shared intimate details of their sexual lives, and 68% of those
who did not report the documented incident of sexual abuse reported other
sexual assaults experienced in childhood. Williams concluded that most
if not all of these women actually did not remember their previously
documented abuse experiences. Williams also found that the closer the
relationship to the perpetrator and the younger the child at the time,
the greater the likelihood an incident was (apparently) not
remembered.
The group of three articles listed below
provide you with a unique opportunity to witness leading scholars and
researchers debate over amnesia for child abuse experiences and to
evaluate the research and arguments for yourself. The first is
Williams' report of the study. The second is a critique of this study
by Elizabeth Loftus (who has declared and argued that repressed memory
is a "myth") and two of her colleagues. The third is Williams' response.
I strongly
encourage you to call local college and university libraries to find
one with this journal (a very reputable and popular one), to make
the trip and make copies.
Williams, L. M. (1994). Recall of childhood trauma: A prospective
study of women's memories of child sexual abuse. Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology, 62, 1167-1176.
Loftus, Elizabeth E. F., Garry, M., & Feldman, J. (1994). Forgetting
sexual trauma: What does it mean when 38% forget. Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology, 62, 1177-1181.
Williams, L. M. (1994). What does it mean to forget child
sexual abuse: A Reply to Loftus, Garry, and Feldman. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 1182-1186.
Study 2
This study is the second from Williams' research interviews with
129 women, 17 years after they were sexually abused and evaluated
in a hospital emergency room. This paper reports
the most important research to date on recovered memories of child
sexual abuse, and is essential reading for anyone who wishes to
evaluate the highest quality evidence currently available.
The relatively young Journal of Traumatic Stress may
not be easy to find, but it is highly respected in the field
of psychological trauma studies. (This article is from a special
issue of the journal, which is presented elsewhere on this page,
as is ordering information.)
Williams, L. M. (1995). Recovered memories of abuse in women
with documented child sexual victimization histories. Journal
of Traumatic Stress, 8, 649-673.
Abstract: "This study provides evidence that some adults who
claim to have recovered memories of sexual abuse recall actual events
that occurred in childhood. One hundred twenty-nine women with documented
histories of sexual victimization in childhood were interviewed and asked
about abuse history. Seventeen years following the initial report of the
abuse, 80 of the women recalled the victimization. One
in 10 women (16% of those who recalled the abuse) reported that at
some time in the past they had forgotten about the abuse. Those
with a prior period of forgetting the women with 'recovered
memories' were younger at the time of abuse and were less likely
to have received support from their mothers than the women who
reported that they had always remembered their victimization.
The women who had recovered memories and those who had always
remembered had the same number of discrepancies when their accounts
of the abuse were compared to the reports from the early 1970's."
Excerpt: "[T]hese findings are important
because they are based on
a prospective study of all reported cases of child sexual abuse in a
community sample. Because the abuse was
documented in hospital records this is the first study to provide
evidence that some adults who claim to have recovered memories
of child sexual abuse recall actual events which occurred in
childhood. These findings are also not limited to a clinical
sample of women in treatment for child sexual abuse. The
findings document the occurrence of recovered memories.
There is no evidence from this study of child
sexual abuse experienced by this community sample of women that
recovery of memories was fostered by therapy or therapists.
For this sample of women memories resurfaced in conjunction
with registering events or reminders and an internal
process of rumination and clarification. For women with greater
economic means than those of the women who comprised this sample,
therapy may play a greater role in recovering memories of child sexual
abuse.
Regarding the
accuracy of the accounts, this study suggests that while the women's
reports of some details have changed (N.B., this may be a problem in
the original account, not the adult memory) the women's stories were
in large part true to the basic elements of the original incident.
Interestingly, despite limited discrepancies, the women themselves were
very often unsure about their memories and said things such as
'What I remember is mostly a dream.' Or, 'I'm really not too sure
about this.' These are statements which may arouse skepticism in
individuals who hear the accounts of women who claim to have recovered
memories of child sexual abuse (e.g., therapists, judges, family
members, researchers, the media). The findings from this study
suggest that such skepticism should be tempered. Indeed, the woman's
level of uncertainty about recovered memories was not associated
with more discrepancies in her account. While
these findings cannot be used to assert the validity of all
recovered memories of child abuse, this study does suggest that
recovered memories of child sexual abuse reported by adults can be
quite consistent with contemporaneous documentation of the abuse and
should not be summarily dismissed by therapists, lawyers, family members,
judges, or the women themselves" (pp.669-670).
Contents
Cathy Spatz Widom
Cathy Spatz Widom is Professor of Criminal Justice and Psychology at the State University of New York in Albany, and a recognized national expert on the causes and consequences of child abuse and neglect. Her highly respected research includes an important and ongoing longitudinal study of a large sample of children with confirmed severe abuse in childhood. Such prospective studies, in which abused children are followed over time, are particularly valuable in the present context because they can be used to study current memories of people who were definitely abused as children. In the two studies below, one on physical abuse on the other sexual abuse, the findings suggest that for both forms of abuse the accuracy of retrospective reports depends on a complex array of factors, including sample selection and assessment methods, whether the person is male or female, and current mental health status (e.g., suffering from depression or not).
Widom, C. S. & Shepard, R. L. (1996). Accuracy of adult recollections of childhood victimization: Part 1. Childhood physical abuse. Psychological Assessment, 8, 412-421.
Abstract: Using data from a study with prospective-cohorts design in which children who were physically abused, sexually abused, or neglected about 20 years ago were followed up along with a matched control group, accuracy of adult recollections of childhood physical abuse was assessed. Two hour in-person interviews were conducted in young adulthood with 1,196 of the original 1,575 participants. Two measures (including the Conflict Tactics Scale) were used to assess histories of childhood physical abuse. Results indicate good discriminant validity and predictive efficiency of the self-report measures, despite substantial underreporting by physically abused respondents. Tests of construct validity reveal shared method variance, with self-report measures predicting self-reported violence and official reports of physical abuse predicting arrests for violence. Findings are discussed in the context of other research on the accuracy of adult recollections of childhood experiences.
Excerpts from the Discussion:
". . . In many ways, these findings indicate accuracy in retrospective self-reports and good discriminant validity. Individuals who were physically abused, based on official records, retrospectively reported the highest rates of childhood physical abuse in the sample. On the CTS (Severe Violence and Very Severe Violence subscales) and the SRCAP [Self-Report Measure of Childhood Physical Abuse], physically abused individuals reported significantly higher rates of physical abuse than did individuals who had experienced sexual abuse or neglect in childhood and individuals who were part of a matched control group. The extent of remembering (i.e., the percentage of individuals who had been physically abused who reported having been physically abused on one of the measures used here) is in line with previous research. These results also reveal that the extent of reporting a history of childhood physical abuse varied dramatically by the criterion (or measure) used.
"At the same time, there is a problem in underreporting of physical abuse. A substantial group of individuals who were physically abused do not report having been physically abused in childhood. Of the 110 people in the sample who had documented cases of physical abuse in childhood, 60-62% reported abuse using the CTS-VSV and SRCAP. This means that approximately 40% of individuals with documented histories of physical abuse did not report. Whether these people did not report (as suggested by Della Femina et al., 1990) because of embarrassment, a wish to protect parents, a sense of having deserved the abuse, a conscious wish to forget the past, or lack of confidence in or rapport with the interviewer, we do not know. But these findings suggest that a substantial minority would not be included in retrospective self-report assessments of childhood physical abuse. A more lenient criterion (such as the CTS-Minor Violence subscale) would capture most of the physically abused people (see Table 2); however, this criterion also identifies 92% of the sexual abuse and neglect cases and 86% of the control participants as having been physically abused in childhood. Using the CTS-Minor Violence subscale, the rate of false positives (as presented in Table 5) approaches almost half the sample. These findings illustrate that the rate of false positives is directly related to the measure of childhood physical abuse used. . .
"Henry et al. (1994) concluded that reliance on retrospective reports about psychosocial variables should be treated with caution. They suggested that "the use of retrospective reports should be limited to testing hypotheses about the relative standing of individuals in a distribution and should not be used to test hypotheses that demand precision in estimating event frequencies and event dates" (p. 92). We support their recommendation to use caution against overly simplistic interpretations that take retrospective reports at face value.
"These methodological problems pose significant challenges to researchers in the field. Notwithstanding the real difficulties involved, there is a critical need to develop reliable and valid ways to assess histories of childhood victimization. . . ."
Widom, C. S. & Morris, S. (1997). Accuracy of adult recollections of childhood victimization: Part 2. Childhood sexual abuse. Psychological Assessment, 8, 412-421.
Abstract: Questions have been raised about the accuracy of retrospective self-reported information about childhood sexual abuse. Using data from a prospective-cohorts-design study, a large group of children who were sexually and physically abused or neglected approximately 20 years ago were followed up and compared with a matched control group. Accuracy of adult recollections of childhood sexual abuse was assessed using 4 different measures, completed in the context of a 2-hr in-person interview in young adulthood ( N = 1, 196). Results indicate gender differences in reporting and accuracy, substantial underreporting by sexually abused respondents in general, good discriminant validity and predictive efficiency of self-report measures for women, and some support for the construct validity of the measures. Implications for researchers and practitioners are discussed.
Excerpts from the Introduction:
". . . [A] significant risk of distortion and loss of information is associated with the recollection of events from a prior time period. If asked to recall childhood events, it is possible that respondents forget or redefine their behaviors in accordance with later life circumstances or their current situation. It is also possible that a person might redefine someone else's behavior in light of current knowledge. Unconscious denial (or repression of childhood traumatic events) may also be at work in preventing the recollection of severe cases of childhood abuse. Furthermore, given society's disapproval of various forms of family violence, a person may be embarrassed to report such experiences or unwilling to reveal such private information in the context of an interview setting. Thus, for a variety of reasons, there may be considerable slippage in accuracy in retrospective reporting. . . .
"Empirical findings suggest that a person's cognitive appraisal of life events strongly influences his or her response (Lazarus & Launier, 1978). The same event may be perceived by different individuals as irrelevant, benign, positive, or threatening and harmful. It is likely that a child's cognitive appraisal of early childhood events will also determine at least in part whether they are experienced as neutral, negative, or harmful. The child's perception might reflect events occurring subsequent to the abuse experience as well as the child's perception of the experience. Theoretically, this is also important because long-term consequences may depend on the person's awareness or memory of the earlier abusive experience or experiences. Considering Lazarus and Folkman's (1984) discussion of the role of cognitive appraisal in mediating one's response to stress, it may be that children who do not define their early childhood experiences as abusive will show better outcomes.
"There may also be gender differences in reporting or willingness to report childhood sexual abuse for a variety of reasons. Female psychiatric patients have been found more likely than male patients to report histories of sexual abuse. . ., female patients have been found more likely than male patients to reveal childhood sexual assault experiences to therapists (Jacobson & Richardson, 1987), and women have reported greater likelihood than men of being a victim of sexual assault (Burnam et al., 1988). Social pressures against reporting early childhood sexual experiences and embarrassment may lead to greater reluctance among men to report, whereas it may be socially more acceptable for women to report such histories. On the other hand, some of the apparent underreporting may be associated with the small number of male victims of sexual abuse in most studies (Finkelhor, 1990).
"One approach to assessing the power or efficiency of retrospective self-report measures is to calculate the relative improvement over chance (RIOC). Loeber and Dishion (1983) devised this index to represent the improvement over chance as a function of the range of its possible predictive efficiency. . . .
"A second approach to establishing the usefulness of retrospective reports of childhood sexual abuse is based on the construct validation process, one of the techniques used to establish the psychometric qualities of assessment instruments. In addition to establishing the validity of retrospective self-report measures using "known groups," construct validity attempts to assess how these self-report measures theoretically relate to other variables or indexes. That is, there are certain theoretical expectations about the way people who have a history of childhood sexual abuse should behave or should manifest certain outcomes. Based on logical relationships, then, tests of construct validity can offer evidence that these measures do or do not measure childhood sexual abuse, without providing definitive proof."
"To validate our retrospective self-report measures of childhood sexual abuse, three outcomes frequently associated with childhood sexual abuse (depression, alcohol problems, and suicide attempts) will be assessed. Ideally, retrospective reports of childhood sexual abuse should relate to subsequent outcomes similar to the way official reports of childhood sexual abuse relate to these outcomes.
Excerpts from the Discussion:
"We examined the accuracy of four retrospective self-report measures of childhood sexual abuse. In general, we found that women and men differ in the extent to which they recall or report having experienced childhood sexual abuse. Approximately 16% of men with documented cases of sexual abuse considered their early childhood experiences sexual abuse, compared with 64% of women with documented cases of sexual abuse. These gender differences may reflect inadequate measurement techniques or an unwillingness on the part of men to disclose this information. They may also reflect differences in the meaning of these behaviors for men and women, particularly viewed in a cultural context. Gender differences in reporting and in perceptions of early childhood experiences may reflect early socialization experiences in which men learn to view these behaviors as nonpredatory and nonabusive. Many of the sexual experiences considered to be sexual abuse (e.g., showing/touching sex organs, kissing in a sexual way) may be seen as developmental rites of passage, part of a learning process. Men reported more sexual experiences in which they touched the other person. Social pressures against reporting certain kinds of early childhood experiences may also lead to greater reluctance among men to report. Future research ought to examine whether the underreporting by men is due to embarrassment or to perceptions about sexual experiences.
"In our examination of the validity of retrospective self-report measures of childhood sexual abuse using known groups, we also found gender differences in the discriminant validity of the four measures. Our results indicate good discriminant validity for the self-report measures used here for women but much less so for men. A higher percentage of women with official histories of childhood sexual abuse recall or report sexual abuse in young adulthood than do women with histories of physical abuse or neglect, who in turn report higher levels than nonabused and nonneglected controls (Table 3). On the other hand, men in our sample with documented cases of sexual abuse do not report higher levels of sexual experiences (any sex before age 12) than do men with documented cases of physical abuse or neglect or control men. Sexually abused men are significantly more likely to consider that they were sexually abused and to report more often having had sex against their will than are controls, but so are physically abused or neglected men. It is noteworthy that more physically abused or neglected men reported having had sex with an older person than did sexually abused men, none of whom reported having had this experience in childhood.
"Overall, we found substantial underreporting of sexual abuse among known victims of childhood sexual abuse. This is particularly impressive because these are court-substantiated (documented) cases of childhood sexual abuse. Much attention has been paid to the lack of recall or failure to report histories of childhood sexual abuse among known victims of abuse. Although this lack of reporting is significant, it may not be surprising when viewed in a somewhat different context. Nonreporting by crime victims in the context of victimization surveys has been studied for a number of years (Garofalo & Hindelang, 1977), and problems with respondent embarrassment about the incident or "protective mechanisms," or simply memory decay or forgetting have been described. . . .
"For women, we found strong relationships between retrospective self-report measures of childhood sexual abuse and the three outcomes examined here: DSM-III-R diagnoses of depression and alcohol abuse/dependence and suicide attempts. We also found that women with documented cases of childhood sexual abuse who were followed up prospectively into young adulthood were at increased risk for having alcohol abuse/dependence diagnosis and for making suicide attempts.
"It was surprising that we did not find that women or men with documented cases of childhood sexual abuse were at increased risk of being diagnosed with depression according to DSM-III-R criteria, despite the widespread belief that childhood sexual abuse leads to depression. We did, however, find a significant relationship between retrospective self-report measures of childhood sexual abuse and depression diagnosis. Thus, this pattern of findings suggests that the relationship between childhood sexual abuse and depression is complicated and may depend on a person's cognitive appraisal of early life events (cf. Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Individuals who meet the criteria for a DSM-III-R depression diagnosis (current or remitted) are more likely to recall having been sexually abused in childhood than individuals without depression diagnoses, although individuals with documented cases of sexual abuse in childhood who were followed up into young adulthood were not at increased risk of receiving a depression diagnosis. This was true for men as well as women in this sample. . . .
"The underreporting we found means that there is a substantial group of people with documented histories of childhood sexual abuse who do not report these experiences when asked in young adulthood to do so. Whether this is due to loss of memory, denial, or embarrassment is not known. However, there are important implications from these these findings for other researchers and clinicians. For researchers, the underreporting of childhood sexual abuse poses a serious concern for epidemiological research, especially that which involves a large proportion of men. For clinicians, these findings reinforce the need to develop more sensitive techniques to elicit this information from men.
Contents
Diana Elliott
Diana Elliott is a psychologist at the University of California
at Los Angeles (UCLA) School of Medicine. She has published two important
studies of delayed recall of abuse and other traumatic
experiences, based on data from a stratified random sample of
the general US population. The most recent of these publications is
an investigation of rates of partial and complete delayed recall for
a variety of traumatic experiences, not just sexual abuse. It was published
in the October 1997 Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
the methodologically rigorous and most prestigious journal of the American
Psychological Association. In that paper, extensively excerpted below,
Elliott uses her findings to address the validity of the construct of
psychogenic or dissociative amnesia and the claim that recovered memories
are the product of questionable therapy practices.
Elliott, D. M. (1997). Traumatic events: Prevalence
and delayed recall in the general population. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 65, 811-820.
Abstract: A random sample of 724 individuals from across the
United States were mailed a questionnaire containing demographic information,
an abridged version of the Traumatic Events Survey (DM Elliott, 1992), and
questions regarding memory for traumatic events. Of these, 505 (70%)
completed the survey. Among respondents who reported
some form of trauma (72%), delayed recall of the event was reported by
32%. This phenomenon was most common among individuals who observed
the murder or suicide of a family member, sexual abuse survivors, and combat
veterans. The severity of the trauma was predictive
of memory status, but demographic variables were not. The most commonly
reported trigger to recall of the trauma was some form of media presentation
(i.e., television show, movie), whereas psychotherapy was the least
commonly reported trigger.
Excerpts from the literature review:
"In contrast to
normal forgetting, theoretical writers in the area of trauma have
suggested that some memory loss in trauma survivors may reflect
dissociative avoidance strategies developed by the victim to reduce
trauma-related distress. . . From this perspective, traumatic memory
loss may be understood as a form of avoidance conditioning, whereby
access to memory is punished by the negative affect that accompanies the
recall, thereby motivating the development of memory-inhibiting mechanisms.
Such avoidance strategies might interfere with memory at any point during
rehearsal, storage, or retrieval of material. . . There are other reasons
for memory loss, such as organic impairment, lack of significance of the
event, and infantile amnesia. However, if access to events is lost
because of avoidance conditioning, the more severe and chronic the
trauma, the more painful the resultant affect should be, and thus, the
more likely the victim's avoidance behavior would be reinforced. . .
". . . [S]ome memory disruption seems to
occur at the retrieval level, rather than solely at rehearsal and storage
levels. According to Tulving (1983), cues that assist in the recall of
events are typically those that match the original encoded material.
This suggests that dissociative avoidance strategies may be effective if
they reduce the individual's responsiveness to relevant cues in the
environment that otherwise may activate the original memory traces. However,
when recognition cues are sufficient in number, intensity, or
meaningfulness, they may overwhelm existing avoidance defenses, resulting
in the emergence of previously unavailable memories. Extreme dissociative
avoidance (i.e., in response to a highly aversive experience), however,
might be relatively resistant to external cuing and, thus, less likely to
remit in response to environmental triggers.
"Understood from this perspective, dissociative
amnesia for previous traumatic events would be best predicted by the severity of
the trauma and most apt to be triggered by intrapersonal, interpersonal, or
environmental cues that closely match the original trauma.
Although certain forms of memory loss (e.g., infantile
amnesia, normal forgetting, organic impairment) may best be predicted by
demographic variables (e.g., age at time of trauma, length of time since the
event, current age), avoidance-related traumatic memory loss should be less
a function of demographic variables and more related to characteristics of
the trauma" (p.812).
Excerpts from the results section:
"Participants were most likely to report
continuous memories of adult sexual assault that did not include
penetration (94%), major motor vehicle accidents (92%), and natural disasters
(89%). A history of partial memory loss was most common when an individual
had witnessed murder or suicide of a loved one (38%), had been victim of
child sexual abuse (22%), and had been a victim of child physical abuse (22%).
A history of complete memory loss was most common among victims of child
sexual abuse (20%), witnesses of combat injury (16%), victims of adult
rape (13%), and witnesses of domestic violence as a child (13%)"
(p.814).
". . . . [T]hose who reported delayed recall (partial
or complete memory loss) of any trauma also reported significantly (a) more
types of trauma, (b) more distress about the trauma (both at the time of the
event and at the time of data collection), and (c) a younger age
at the time of the earliest trauma.
"The relationship between age and a history
of memory loss could be due to the normal lack of recall for events
occurring in the first 3 to 4 years of life (i.e., infantile amnesia) for those
victimized in early childhood (Loftus, 1993). To examine this hypothesis,
I completed a second analysis, deleting the 24 participants who reported
trauma before the age of 5. This produced no change in the results,
with memory loss more frequently reported when the trauma occurred at
a younger age. . ." (p.814)
". . . Across traumas, participants
reported that recall was most commonly triggered by some sort of media
presentation (54%), an experience similar to the original trauma (37%),
and a conversation with a family member. Recall of the trauma was
least likely to have been triggered by a sexual experience (17%), or
psychotherapy (14%)" (p.815).
Excerpts from the discussion section:
"The findings of the present study suggest
that a history of trauma is common in the United States. For example,
40% of respondents experienced a major motor vehicle accident or natural
disaster, 43% had witnessed violence, and 50% had been victims of
interpersonal violence. . . .
"These data also suggest that delayed recall
of traumatic experiences may not be uncommon, with some proportion of
individuals reporting impaired recollection for virtually every type of
trauma. This phenomenon appears to be more common among events considered
particularly upsetting or distressing (e.g., among childhood sexual abuse
survivors, those who witnessed the murder or suicide of a loved one, and
veterans who witnessed combat injury) and less common for events that
contained no interpersonal violence (e.g., major motor vehicle accidents,
disasters, and having a child die under the age of 18)" (p.816).
"Race was the only demographic variable that
was even marginally associated with delayed recall of a trauma, and the
race-memory relationship was mediated by the severity of the trauma
experienced. However, several characteristics of trauma
severity predicted memory status. Such data support an avoidance defense
mechanism hypothesis as a partial explanation for the findings, because more
traumatic events would appear more likely to be remembered, not forgotten,
if no defensive response was involved" (p.817).
"The extent to which the questions used in
the present study may have been misunderstood by participants is unclear.
However, a pretest of the questions used in this study indicated that
96% of the individuals understood the questions to refer to a period
of time in which the individual was unable to access part or all of the
memory of the traumatic event, as opposed to simply not thinking about
the trauma. Additionally, participants in the present study went on to
record their age at recall of each specific trauma and indicated what it
was that cued their recall. Given these data, misinterpreting the
questions to be about normal forgetting is not likely to be a sufficient
explanation for the memory findings reported here" (p.818).
"This study does not support the notion
that delayed recall is limited to sexual abuse. It suggests that the
phenomena occurs across a variety of traumas and is especially high for
traumatic events involving interpersonal victimization" (p.818).
"With regard to the
claim [that therapy creates recovered memories], only 14% of the
participants in this study who reported delayed recall of a trauma
reported having their memory triggered during the course of therapy. Even
if all the individuals who had ever been in treatment reported delayed recall
of trauma (a conservative assumption), 86% of the sample, nevertheless,
reported recovering memory through other means. This finding suggests that
the process of psychotherapy, per se, does not intrinsically explain the
recovered memory phenomenon. Rather, these data suggest that, like other
posttraumatic stress responses, intrusion of previously avoided memory
can be cued by environmental stimuli, perhaps in the same way as has been
documented with posttraumatic flashbacks. . ." (p.818)
The final paragraph:
"As previously noted, the best predictor of
memory status was the severity of the trauma, rather than demographic
variables. These findings suggest that the traumatic impact of the
event rather than childhood amnesia, normal forgetting,
secondary gain, or iatrogenic treatment effects provides a
good conceptual fit to the data. Many authors (Herman, 1992; Terr, 1994;
van der Kolk, et al., 1996) have noted that traumatic amnesia is a
complex phenomenon that involves biological, cognitive, and psychological
aspects that may vary from traditional notions of 'normal' memory. In
this regard, future research might focus on such processes as they
relate to normal versus traumatic encoding, forgetting, and recalling"
(p.818).
Elliott, D. M., & Briere, J. (1995). Posttraumatic stress associated
with delayed recall of sexual abuse: A general population study.
Journal of Traumatic Stress, 8, 629-647.
Abstract: "This study examined delayed recall of childhood
sexual abuse in a stratified random sample of the general population
(N = 505). Of participants who reported a history
of sexual abuse, 42% described some period of time when they had
less memory of the abuse than they did at the time of data
collection. No demographic differences were found between
subjects with continuous recall and those who reported delayed
recall. However, delayed recall was associated with the use of
threats at the time of the abuse. Subjects who had recently recalled
aspects of their abuse reported particularly high levels of posttraumatic
symptomatology and self difficulties (as measured by the IES, SCL, and
TSI) at the time of data collection compared to other subjects."
Contents
Bessel van der Kolk
Boston University psychiatrist Bessel van der Kolk is one
of the foremost authorities on traumatic memory, particularly the
possible roles of biological and dissociative phenomena in the
processes of encoding and retrieval. (I have conducted research with
Dr. van der Kolk and co-authored papers on traumatic memories with him.)
The five papers below, four of which are available on the web, cover some of
Dr. van der Kolk's key contributions to the study of traumatic memory.
The first three papers are
available on the web, and these document progress in the measurement of
traumatic memory characteristics with the Traumatic Memory Inventory.
The introduction to "Exploring the Nature of Traumatic
Memories" addresses important historical and methodological issues in
research and theory concerning traumatic memories, and how these necessarily differ
from research and theory concerning normal memories. "Retrieving, Assessing, and
Classifying Traumatic Memories," of which I am the primary author, introduces a
new method for evoking and assessing the nature of traumatic memories, is rich
with clinical data, and has extensive discussions of methodological and
theoretical issues. "Dissociation and the Fragmentary Nature of Traumatic
Memories" is a classic in the field, and essential reading for anyone who
wants to understand how the psychological construct of dissociation
sheds much more light on the nature of many traumatic memories than
that of repression.
van der Kolk, B. A., Hopper, J. W., & Osterman, J. E. (2001).
Exploring
the Nature of Traumatic Memory: Combining Clinical Knowledge with Laboratory
Methods. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment,
& Trauma, 4, 9-31; and Freyd, J. F., & DePrince, A. P. (Editors).
Trauma and Cognitive Science (pp. 9-31). Binghamton,
NY: Haworth Press.
Abstract: "For over 100 years clinicians have observed and
described the unusual nature of traumatic memories. It has been repeatedly
and consistently observed that these memories are characterized by fragmentary
and intense sensations and affects, often with little or no verbal narrative
content. Yet, possibly because traumatic memories cannot be precipitated under
laboratory conditions, the organization of traumatic memories has received
little systematic scientific investingation. In our laboratory we have
developed an instrument, the Traumatic Memory Inventory (TMI), which
systematically assesses the ways that memories of traumatic experience are
organized and retrieved over time. In this paper we report findings from our
third study using the TMI, of 16 subjects who had the traumatic experience of
awakening from general anesthesia during surgery. We assessed changes in
traumatic memory characteristics over time and differences between memories
of subjects with and without current Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. Our
findings suggest the need for more rigorous methods for the assessment of
the evolution of traumatic memories. In order to develop a comprehensive
and integrated understanding of the nature of traumatic memory, we need to
combine careful clinical observations with replicable laboratory methods,
including those of cognitive science and neuroscience."
Excerpts: "The understanding of how people process
traumatic events has, until recently, been entirely within the domain of
clinical practice and observation. Traditionally, the fields of clinical
psychology and psychiatry on the one hand, and cognitive science and
neuroscience on the other, have had such widely divergent samples,
methodologies and concepts on which they based their understandings of
memory processes, that there has been a veritable confusion of tongues
between these disciplines. During the past decade, when the observation
that people may lose all memory for sexual abuse experiences and retrieve
them at a later time was brought to the public's attention, many cognitive
scientists took an incredulous stance. Yet for over a century this observation
had been consistently reported in the psychiatric literature on other
traumatized populations. Despite dozens of reports, starting with Pierre Janet
(1889) in the 1880s, followed by Breuer and Freud (1893), repeated during the
first World War (Meyers, 1915; Southard, 1919), the second World War (Sargant
and Slater, 1941) and the Vietnam War (van der Kolk, 1987), most laboratory
scientists disregarded the validity of these observations. In the past decade
a small group of cognitive scientists began to take clinical reports seriously
(Freyd, 1991, 1994; Morton, 1994; Schooler, 1994). However, because amnesia
and delayed recall for traumatic experiences had never been observed in the
laboratory, many cognitive scientists adamantly denied that these phenomena
existed (e.g., Loftus, 1993; Loftus & Ketcham, 1994), or that retrieved
traumatic memories could be accurate (Kihlstrom, 1995).
"In both science and therapy we often are confronted with unexpected findings.
Whether one is a laboratory scientist or a clinician, such phenomena ideally
should provoke new insights and creative theoretical and methodological advances.
Laboratory scientists' practice of "controlled" research may render them more
prone to observe the phenomena that they set out to measure, while clinicians
cannot help but be frequently confronted with unexpected phenomena that don't
fit their constructs and models. This often forces them to suspend disbelief
and to attend to the unfolding of clinical data for which they have no
pre-existing explanations" (pp. 10-11).
"Despite the power of these clinical observations, these phenomena have not
been systematically studied in the laboratory. The
problem is not that
laboratory science cannot study traumatic memories, but that laboratory
science cannot study traumatic memories under conditions in which the
memories studied are for events that take place in the laboratory. The
event encoded into memory simply cannot be a 'controlled' variable in the
laboratory science sense, as in landmark work of Loftus and her colleagues
with systematically altered films of car accidents (Loftus, 1975, 1979). This
is so because, for ethical reasons, not scientific ones, the extreme
terror and helplessness that precede the development of PTSD simply cannot
be replicated in such a setting. Roger Pitman (personal communication, July,
1996) attempted to simulate a truly traumatic stressor by having college
students watch "The Faces of Death," a film consisting of actual footage of
deaths and mutilations of people and animals, in the laboratory. Even this
stimulus, which is probably as extreme as any institutional review board
would allow, failed to precipitate PTSD symptoms in these normal volunteers.
"Hence it appears inescapable that to study the nature
of traumatic memories one must study the memories of people who have actually
been traumatized..."
(pp. 11-12)
"Shobe and Kihlstrom (1997) recently published an article
claiming that traumatic memories are qualitatively not any different from memories
of ordinary events. Without actually having studied the memories of traumatized
individuals themselves, they dismissed all existing observational studies of
the memories of individuals with PTSD out of hand. Their rationale for doing
so is found in the article's final section, "Clinical lore and scientific
evidence."
Although their ideas about the underlying mechanisms are different,
Terr, van der Kolk and Whitfield all agree on the outcome: Memories of trauma,
or at least of certain forms of trauma, are encoded by processes, such as
repression and dissociation, that make them difficult to retrieve as coherent
verbal narratives. The result is that traumatic memories are primarily
available as isolated, nonverbal, sensory, motor, and emotional fragments. If
this conclusion were valid... (1997, p.74).
"Shobe and Kilhstrom have reversed the order of things. First, clinicians
working with traumatized individuals found themselves confronted with unexpected
observations: incoherent memories of 'isolated, nonverbal, sensory, motor, and
emotional fragments.' Second, once they were struck by the consistency of
this observation, clinician-scientists looked for theoretical constructs to
make sense of the data.
"Initially, the constructs of repression and dissociation were the best they
could find. It is not that pioneering students of traumatic memory ignored
laboratory evidence, or that they did not search among laboratory scientists'
constructs for ones that could help them explain the data they were
encountering. It is just that when it came to delayed recall and the
fragmentary nature of many traumatic memories, clinician-scientists encountered
a conceptual void in the laboratory memory research literature. Laboratory
scientists had studied memories for events they had created under controlled
conditions, and thus had never encountered fragmentary traumatic memories. In
short, laboratory scientists never had a reason to create constructs
explicitly addressing fragmentary traumatic memories.
"After first encountering inescapable empirical evidence of how traumatic
memories can differ from non-traumatic ones, and second, searching for
constructs to describe and explain their observations, more recent students of
traumatic memory then set out to conduct systematic research on the
characteristics of traumatic memory. Early studies focused on the controversial
phenomena of amnesia and delayed recall... Laboratory memory
scientists like Kilhstrom (1995) and Loftus (1993) have vigorously attacked
this line of research. However, others including Freyd (1991, 1994, 1996),
Morton (1994) and Schooler (1994) have taken seriously the observations of
clinicians and clinician-scientists' research on traumatic memory. These
researchers have led the way in applying cognitive science constructs to the
full complexity of traumatic memories, including phenomena like delayed
recall and fragmentation" (pp. 13-14).
Hopper, J. W., & van der Kolk, B. A. (2001).
Retrieving, Assessing, and
Classifying Traumatic Memories: A Preliminary Report on Three Case Studies
of a New Standardized Method. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment,
& Trauma, 4, 33-71; and Freyd, J. F., & DePrince, A. P. (Editors).
Trauma and Cognitive Science (pp. 33-71).
Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.
Abstract: "The study of traumatic memories is still an emerging
field, both methodologically and theoretically. Previous questionnaire and
interview methods for studying traumatic memories have been limited in their
ability to evoke and assess remembrances with the characteristics long observed
by clinicians. In this paper, we introduce a new standardized method that
incorporates a laboratory procedure for retrieving memories of traumatic
events and a clinically informed measure for assessing these memories'
characteristics. We present three case studies to demonstrate the data
yielded by script-driven remembering and the Traumatic Memory Inventory -
Post-Script Version (TMI-PS). We then discuss subjects' script-driven
remembrances in terms of methodology, theoretical classification of
traumatic memories, and the interplay between the two. Finally, we
critique our method in detail and offer suggestions for future research.
If validated as a method for evoking and assessing traumatic memories, and
shown to yield reliable data, this integrative method shows great promise
for advancing both clinical and cognitive research on traumatic memories."
Excerpt: "In recent years, much of the research on
traumatic memories has focused on recovered memories, true or false, and
much of the theory on speculations about encoding and storage processes
responsible for amnesia and delayed recall. This state of affairs has
largely been a function of social and cultural factors.
Scientifically speaking, however, the cart may have been put before the horse.
That is, even though research on episodic traumatic memories is dependent on subjects'
reports of memories they have just retrieved, research has shed little light
on the processes and contents of memory retrieval in traumatized individuals.
In this paper, we present a new method for evoking traumatic memories and
assessing some of their basic characteristics. Our method brings together
a laboratory procedure for standardized retrieval of memories, and a
semi-structured interview for assessing memory characteristics based on
well-established observations by clinicians dealing with traumatized patients.
We offer this easily adapted approach to promote controlled research on the
characteristics of traumatic memories, particularly prospective studies of
their transformations over time.
"Endel Tulving's (1972) classic chapter on
episodic and semantic memory begins, "One of the unmistakable signs of an
immature science is the looseness of definition and use of its major
concepts" (p.381). This certainly appears to be the case today for the
scientific study of traumatic memories. Use of the unitary construct of
"traumatic memory" is common, though clinical experience and recent
empirical and theoretical work suggest that memories for traumatic
experiences are complex and heterogeneous phenomena, which change over
time in a variety of ways. At this early stage, it might be more helpful
to use the super-ordinate and plural construct of "traumatic memories" and
methodically build a definitional taxonomy - just as traditional memory
researchers have done since Tulving's incisive statement nearly 30 years ago.
"A primary goal of this paper is to demonstrate
that progress toward an empirically derived taxonomy of traumatic memories
will be advanced by more attention to the following: (1) memory retrieval or
evocation methods, and (2) instruments for assessing memory characteristics.
We also aim to show that the former must draw more from laboratory research,
and the latter from clinical experience and understanding... We believe such
changes in shared theoretical and methodological frameworks can foster the
understanding, communication and collaboration needed to advance the
field (pp. 34-35).
van der Kolk, B. A., & Fisler, R. (1995).
Dissociation and
the fragmentary nature of traumatic memories: Overview and exploratory
study. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 8, 505-525.
Abstract: "Since trauma arises from an inescapable stressful
event that overwhelms people's coping mechanisms, it is uncertain to
what degree the results of laboratory studies of ordinary events are
relevant to the understanding of traumatic memories. This paper reviews
the literature on differences between recollections of stressful and of
traumatic events. It then reviews the evidence implicating dissociation
as the central pathogenic mechanism that gives rise to posttraumatic
stress disorder (PTSD). A systematic exploratory
study of 46 subjects with PTSD indicated that traumatic memories
were retrieved, at least initially, in the form of dissociated
mental imprints of sensory and affective elements of the
traumatic experience: as visual, olfactory, affective, auditory,
and kinesthetic experiences. Over time, subjects reported the
gradual emergence of a personal narrative that can be properly
referred to as 'explicit memory.' The implications of these
findings for understanding the nature of traumatic memories are
discussed."
Excerpt: "Trauma
and dissociation. Dissociation refers to the
compartmentalization of experience: elements of the
experience are not integrated into a unitary whole, but are
stored in memory as isolated fragments consisting of sensory
perceptions or affect states. . . However,
the word dissociation is currently used to describe four distinct,
but interrelated phenomena: (1) the sensory and emotional
fragmentation of experience. . . (2) depersonalization [feeling that you
are not real] and derealization [feeling the world is unreal] at the moment
of the trauma. . . (3) ongoing depersonalization or 'spacing out' in
everyday life. . . (4) containing traumatic memories within distinct
ego-states (Dissociative Disorder). . . . The
precise interrelationships among these various phenomena remain
to be spelled out: not all people
who have vivid sensory intrusions of traumatic events also experience
depersonalization, while only a small proportion of people who have
both of these experiences will go on to chronically dissociate, or to
develop a full-blown dissociative disorder" (pp.510-511).
Christianson (1982)
has described how, when people feel threatened, they experience a
significant narrowing of consciousness, and remain merely focussed
on the central perceptual details. As people are being traumatized,
this narrowing of consciousness sometimes evolves into amnesia for
parts of the event, or for the entire experience. Students of traumatized
individuals have repeatedly noted that during conditions of high arousal
'explicit memory' may fail. The individual is left in a state of 'speechless
terror' in which he or she lacks words to describe what has happened. . .
However, while traumatized individuals may be unable to give a coherent
narrative of the incident, there may be no interference with implicit
memory: they may 'know' the emotional valence of a stimulus and be aware of
associated perceptions, without being able to articulate the reasons for
feeling or behaving in a particular way" (p.511).
Excerpts from the study's results:
- "Of the 36 subjects with childhood trauma,
15 (42%) had suffered significant or total amnesia for their trauma
at some time in their lives" (p.516).
- "Twenty-seven of the 36 subjects with
childhood trauma reported confirmation of their childhood trauma
from a mother, sibling, or other source who knew about the abuse, from
court or hospital records, or from confessions or convictions of the
perpetrator(s)" (pp.516-517).
- "Subjects considered most questions about the [comparison]
nontraumatic memory nonsensical: none had olfactory, visual, auditory,
kinesthetic reliving experience related to such events as high school
graduations, birthdays, weddings, or births of their children. They also
denied having vivid dreams or flashbacks about these events. Subjects
claimed not to have periods in their lives when they had amnesias
for any of these events, and none of the subjects felt the need to
make special efforts to suppress memories of these events" (p.517).
- "No subject reported having a narrative for
the traumatic event as their initial mode of awareness (they claimed
not having been able to tell a story about what had happened), regardless
of whether they had continuous awareness of what had happened, or
whether there had been a period of amnesia. . . [A]ll subjects,
regardless of age at which the first trauma occurred, reported
that they initially 'remembered' the trauma in the form of
somatosensory or emotional flashback experiences. At the peak of their
intrusive recollections all sensory modalities were enhanced, and a
narrative memory started to emerge" (p.517).
- "[The score of subjects on the Dissociative Experiences Scale] was
significantly correlated with the event-related variables of duration of
the trauma. . . , presence of physical abuse. . ., and presence of
neglect. . . Also, level of dissociation was correlated with affective
reliving. . ., kinesthetic reliving. . . lack of current narrative
memory. . . and with self-destructive self-soothing behaviors. . .
Dissociation was not correlated with the self-soothing behaviors of
talking things over, working, cleaning, sleeping or turning to
religion" (p.517-518).
van der Kolk, B. A. (1994).
The body
keeps the score: Memory and the evolving psychobiology of posttraumatic
stress. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 1, 253-265.
Excerpt: "[Posttraumatic Stress Disorder], by definition, is accompanied
by memory disturbances, consisting of both hypermnesias [inabilities to
forget] and amnesias. . . Research into the nature
of traumatic memories. . . indicates that trauma interferes with declarative
memory, i.e. conscious recall of experience, but does not inhibit implicit,
or non-declarative memory, the memory system that controls conditioned
emotional responses, skills and habits, and sensorimotor sensations related
to experience. There now is enough information available about the
biology of memory storage and retrieval to start building coherent
hypotheses regarding the underlying psychobiological processes involved in
these memory disturbances. . ."
van der Kolk, B. A., & van der Hart, O. (1989). Pierre
Janet and the breakdown of adaption in psychological trauma.
American Journal of Psychiatry, 146, 1530-1540.
Abstract: "In the reappraisal of the work of Pierre
Janet at the centenary of the publication of L'automatisme
psychologique, the authors review his investigations into
the mental processes that transform traumatic experience into
psychopathology. Janet was the first to
systematically study dissociation as the crucial psychological
process with which the organism reacts to overwhelming
experiences and show that traumatic memories may be
expressed as sensory perceptions, affect states, and
behavioral reenactments. Janet provided a
broad framework that unifies into a larger perspective the
various approaches to psychological functioning which have
developed along independent lines in this century. Today his
integrated approach may help clarify the interrelationships
among such diverse topics as memory processes, state-dependent
learning, dissociative reactions, and posttraumatic psychopathology."
Excerpt: "[Janet wrote that when] people become too upset to tell
their story, these [traumatic] memories cannot be transformed
into a neutral narrative: 'the person is unable to make the
recital which we call narrative memory, and yet he remains in the
difficult situation'. . . This results in a 'phobia of memory' . . .
that prevents the integration ('synthesis') of traumatic events
and splits off the traumatic memories from ordinary consciousness. . .
The memory traces of the trauma linger as
subconscious fixed ideas that cannot be 'liquidated' as long
as they have not been transformed into a personal narrative
and instead continue to intrude as terrifying perceptions,
obsessional preoccupations, and somatic experiences, such
as anxiety reactions" (p.1533).
Contents
Judith Lewis Herman
These four papers by Harvard psychiatrist Judith Herman
and her colleagues Mary Harvey and Emily Schatzow address fundamental
issues in the memory controversy. Judith Herman is the author of
Trauma and Recovery, which is widely
viewed as the best book yet written on psychological trauma and recovery;
it includes an excellent chapter entitled "Remembrance and Mourning."
The first paper below was published in 1987,
before the False Memory Syndrome Foundation had come into existence.
Herman and Schatzow present evidence that patients may recover
verifiable memories of childhood sexual abuse in the course of group
treatment. In the second paper, Harvey and Herman show how the knowledge of
clinicians should inform scientific research on traumatic memory. In the
third paper, Herman articulates the "dialectic of psychological trauma"
which characterizes both individuals' struggles with their traumatic memories
and social controversies like that over recovered memories. She illuminates the ways that
victims, perpetrators and bystanders respond to crimes ranging from
organized political violence to the private crimes of sexual and domestic
violence and the moral obligations of mental health professionals who
find themselves embroiled in such situations. I have provided an extended
excerpt in which Herman addresses the utility of the construct of
dissociation for understanding paradoxical qualities of traumatic memories.
In the fourth paper and most recent paper, Herman and Harvey review 77 intake evaluations
conducted in their own outpatient program, and report that trauma-specific
reminders and recent life crises, not previous psychotherapy, are the
typical precipitants of delayed recall.
Herman, J. L., & Schatzow, E. (1987). Recovery and
verification of memories of childhood sexual trauma.
Psychoanalytic Psychology, 4, 1-14.
Abstract: "Fifty-three women outpatients
participated in short-term therapy groups for incest survivors. This
treatment modality proved to be a powerful stimulus for recovery of
previously repressed traumatic memories. A relationship was observed
between the age of onset, duration, and degree of violence of the abuse
and the extent to which the memory of the abuse had been repressed.
Three out of four patients were able to validate
their memories by obtaining corroborating evidence from other
sources. The therapeutic function of recovering and validating
traumatic memories is explored."
Excerpts: "The majority of the patients (64%) did
not have full recall of the sexual abuse but reported at least some
degree of amnesia. . . Just over one quarter of the women (28%)
reported severe memory deficits [i.e., recalled very little from childhood,
reported recent eruption of previously inaccessible memories, or had
such recall during the course of group treatment]" (p.4).
"The majority of
patients (74%) were able to obtain confirmation of the abuse from
another source. Twenty-one women (40%) obtained corroborating evidence
from the perpetrator himself, from other family members, or from
physical evidence such as diaries or photographs. Another 18 women
(34%) discovered that another child, usually a sibling, had been
abused by the same perpetrator. An additional 5 women (9%) reported
statements from other family members indicating a strong likelihood
that they had also been abused, but did not confirm their suspicions
by direct questioning. The three following case examples illustrate
corroboration of the incest histories by, respectively, admission of
the perpetrator, testimony of other family members, and physical
evidence.
"Andrea (Case Example 1) wrote a letter to her stepfather confronting him
about the sexual abuse and demanding an apology. Her stepfather
responded by phone. He acknowledged 'fooling around' with her but
refused to apologize, stating that she knew she 'wanted it as much
as he did.' He did not believe the abuse had been harmful because
vaginal intercourse had not occurred, and added resentfully that he
had respected her virginity, only to have her 'throw it away on a bum.'
He concluded the conversation by exhorting her to stop blaming the
family for the troubles she had brought upon herself.
"Bernadette (Case Example 2) disclosed the sexual abuse to her mother,
who burst into tears and cried, 'Oh no! Not you too!' She then told
Bernadette that after she left home, her younger sisters had complained
that their father tried to molest them.
"After a heroic military career, Claudia's brother (Case Example 3) was
killed in combat in Vietnam. Her parents continued to make pilgrimages
to his grave, and had transformed their home into a shrine dedicated
to his memory. His room with all of his belongings, had been left
untouched. During a visit to her parents home, Claudia conducted a
search of her brother's room. In a closet she found an extensive
pornography collection, handcuffs, and a diary in which he planned and
recorded his sexual 'experiments' with his sister in minute detail"
(p.10).
Harvey, M. R., & Herman, J. L. (1994). Amnesia, partial
amnesia, and delayed recall among adult survivors of childhood
trauma. Consciousness and Cognition, 4, 295-306.
Abstract: "Clinical experience suggests that adult survivors
of childhood trauma arrive at their memories in a number of ways, with
varying degrees of associated distress and uncertainty and, in some
cases, after memory lapses of varying duration and extent.
Among those patients who enter psychotherapy
as a result of early abuse, three general patterns of traumatic
recall are identified: (1) relatively continuous recall of
childhood abuse experiences coupled with changing interpretations
(delayed understandings) of these experiences, (2) partial amnesia
for abuse events, accompanied by a mixture of delayed recall and
delayed understanding, and (3) delayed recall following a period of
profound and pervasive amnesia. These patterns are represented by three
composite clinical vignettes. Variations among them suggest that the
phenomena underlying traumatic recall are continuous and not dichotomous.
Future research into the nature of traumatic memory should be informed
by clinical observation."
Excerpt: "One aim of this paper is simply to
describe the variations in traumatic recall that are frequently
witnessed in clinical settings by ethical, observant, and reliable
psychotherapists. Another is to counter an increasingly adversarial
relationship between memory researchers who are relatively less
familiar with clinical realities than they might be and clinicians who
feel placed on the defensive by sweeping accusations of professional
malfeasance" (p.297).
Herman, J. L. (1995). Crime and memory. Bulletin of the
American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 23, 5-17.
Abstract: "The conflict between
knowing and not knowing, speech and silence, remembering and
forgetting, is the central dialectic of psychological trauma.
This conflict is manifest in the individual
disturbances of memory, the amnesias and hypermnesias [inabilities to
forget], of traumatized people. It is manifest also on a social level, in persisting debates
over the historical reality of atrocities that have been documented
beyond any reasonable doubt. Social
controversy becomes particularly acute at moments in history
when perpetrators face the prospect of being publicly exposed
or held legally accountable for crimes long hidden or condoned.
This situation obtains in many countries emerging
from dictatorship, with respect to political crimes such as murder and
torture. It obtains in this country with respect to the private crimes
of sexual and domestic violence. This article examines a current public
controversy, regarding the credibility of adult recall of childhood
abuse, as a classic example of the dialectic of trauma."
Excerpt: "On the one hand, traumatized people
remember too much; on the other hand, they remember too little
. . . . The memories intrude when they
are not wanted, in the form of nightmares, flashbacks, and behavioral
reenactments. Yet the memories may not be accessible when they are
wanted. Major parts of the story may be missing, and sometimes an entire
event or series of events may be lost. We have by now a very large body
of data indicating that trauma simultaneously enhances and impairs
memory. How can we account for this? If traumatic events are (in the words
of Robert J. Lifton) 'indelibly imprinted,' then how can they also be
inaccessible to ordinary memory?"
When scientific
observations present a paradox, one way of resolving the contradiction
is to ignore selectively some of the data. Hence we find some
authorities even today asserting that traumatic amnesia cannot
possibly exist because, after all, traumatic events are strongly
remembered. Fortunately for the enterprise of science, empirical
observations do not go away simply because simplistic theories fail to
explain them. On the contrary, I believe that some of the most important
discoveries arise from attempts to understand apparent paradoxes of this
kind. I would like to offer two theoretical constructs that may help us
clarify and organize our thinking in this area. The first is the concept
of state-dependent learning; the second is the distinction between storage
and retrieval of memory. . . .
When
people are in a state of terror, attention is narrowed and perceptions
are altered. Peripheral detail, context, and time sense fall away, while attention is strongly focused on
central detail in the immediate present. When the focus of attention is
extremely narrow, people may experience profound perceptual distortions,
including insensitivity to pain, depersonalization, time slowing and amnesia.
This is that state we call dissociation. . . .
Traumatic events
have great power to elicit dissociative reactions.
Some people dissociate spontaneously in response to terror.
Others may learn to induce this state voluntarily, especially
if they are exposed to traumatic events over and over. Political prisoners
instruct one another in simple self-hypnosis techniques in order to
withstand torture. In my clinical work with incest survivors, again and
again I have heard how as children they taught themselves to enter a
trance state.
These profound
alterations of consciousness at the time of the trauma may explain
some of the abnormal features of the memories that are laid down.
It may well be that because of the narrow focusing of attention,
highly specific somatic and sensory information may
be deeply engraved in memory, whereas contextual information,
time-sequencing, and verbal narrative may be poorly registered. In other
words, people may fail to establish the associative linkages
that are part of ordinary memory.
If this were so, we would expect to find
abnormalities not only in storage of traumatic memories, but also in
retrieval. On the one hand, we would expect that the normal process of
strategic search, that is, scanning autobiographical memory to create
a coherent sequential narrative, might be relatively ineffective as a
means of gaining access to traumatic memory. On the other hand, we
would expect that certain trauma-specific sensory cues, or biologic
alterations that produce a state of hyperarousal, might be effective.
We would also expect that traumatic memories might be unusually
accessible in a trance state.
This is, of course, just what clinicians
have observed for the past century. The role of altered states of
consciousness in the pathogenesis of traumatic memory was discovered
independently by Janet and Freud and Breuer 100 years ago" (pp.7-9).
Herman, J. L., & Harvey, M. R. (1997). Adult memories of
childhood trauma: A naturalistic clinical study.
Journal of Traumatic Stress, 10, 557-571.
Abstract: "The clinical evaluations of 77 adult outpatients
reporting memories of childhood trauma were reviewed. A majority of
patients reported some degree of continuous recall. Roughly half (53%)
said they had never forgotten the traumatic events. Two smaller groups
described a mixture of continuous and delayed recall (17%) or a period
of complete amnesia followed by delayed recall (16%).
Patients with and without delayed recall did not differ significantly
in the proportions reporting corroboration of their memories from other
sources. Idiosyncratic, trauma-specific reminders and recent life
crises were most commonly cited as precipitants to delayed recall.
A previous psychotherapy was cited as a factor in a minority (28%)
of cases. By contrast, intrusion of memories after a period of amnesia
was frequently cited as a factor leading to the decision to seek
psychotherapy. The implications of these findings are discussed
with respect to the role of psychotherapy in the process of recovering
traumatic memories."
Excerpts: "The types of childhood trauma reported were as follows:
59% patient (77%) reported sexual abuse, 53 (69%) reported physical
abuse, and 24 (31%) reported witnessing intrafamilial violence. Of the
group who reported witnessing violence, all but two patients reported
having been directly victimized as well. Forty five patients (58%)
reported exposure to two or more types of childhood trauma, and 12 (16%)
reported exposure to all three types.
"Table 1 [see below] summarizes the manner
in which patients described the continuity of their memories. A majority
of patients reported that they had always remembered their childhood
experiences. Thirteen patients reported a mixture of continuous and
delayed recall. In this category, some patients who had experienced more
than one type of abuse made a distinction between their continuous
memories for one type of abuse and delayed recall of another. Others
reported that they had always known that they were abused, but had
initially remembered other, often earlier instances of abuse. Twelve
patients described a period of complete amnesia followed by delayed recall" (p.563).
". . . The type
of precipitant most frequently identified was an idiosyncratic,
trauma-specific reminder whose meaning could only be understood in the
context of the patient's history. Examples included a chance meeting
with a childhood friend, returning to a former neighborhood, or learning
of the violent death of a relative (pp.563-564).
"Although
patients were not asked whether they had any information which might
confirm their memories of childhood abuse, 33 patients (43%)
spontaneously described some type of corroboration.
Only seven patients described having undertaken an active
search for evidence that might confirm their memories; the majority
of the patient who had such evidence had not actively sought it.
Among the 25 patients who reported some degree of amnesia and delayed
recall, nine (36%) reported having obtained confirming evidence for
their memories, while among the patients who did not report any
memory deficits, a slightly larger proportion (24 of 52, or 46%)
reported obtaining corroboration. The difference between the two
groups was not statistically significant" (p.565).
"The most common
types of confirmation came from family members who told the patient
that they had either directly witnessed or indirectly known of the
abuse. Eleven patients described confirming information that was
meaningful only in context and hence difficult to categorize. For
example, one patient had recently learned from a former classmate that
her abuser, a revered junior high school teacher, suddenly left
the school 'under a cloud,' and soon afterwards married an adolescent
girl who had been his pupil. This type of information is listed as
an idiosyncratic source [see Table 4 below]. Of the patients
who reported this type of evidence, seven also had confirmatory
information from other sources. Ten patients reported obtaining
more than one type of confirmation. It should be noted that
interviewers did not attempt to verify independently the information
given by the patients (pp.565-566).
"The Victims of Violence Program. . .
is a setting known for offering feminist-informed treatment to
crime victims, both men and women. As such, it might be expected to
attract patients who identify themselves as survivors of childhood
abuse. The selective nature of our patient population may account
for some differences between our findings and those of previous
investigators, and may limit the generalizability of our data.
However, the main findings of this study are congruent with
previous studies documenting memory disturbances in a considerable
proportion of patients with histories of childhood trauma"
(pp.566-567).
"Our data also
suggest that delayed recall of childhood trauma is often a process
that unfolds over time rather than a single event, and that it
occurs most commonly in the context of a life crisis or developmental
milestone, with a trauma-specific reminder serving as a proximal cue
to new recall. Psychotherapy was not implicated in the early stages
of delayed recall in most cases. However, the retrieval of memories,
once begun, proved to be a powerful incentive for entering
psychotherapy. Patients rarely sought treatment with the goal of
recovering more memories; rather, they wished to gain more control
over intrusive, involuntary reliving experiences and to make sense
of the fragmented, often confusing and disturbing recollections they
already had" (p.567).
"Though psychotherapy
may turn out to play a minor role in initiating recall of traumatic
events, it often does play a role in enlarging and changing patients'
understanding of their past. We believe that the proper role of
psychotherapy is to provide an environment of confidentiality and
empathic, nonjudgemental attention, where uncertainty, complexity and
ambivalence are tolerated. A stance of open-minded, reflective
curiosity should prevail. Such an environment stands in marked contrast
to the adversarial, polarized environment of the courtroom. We believe,
however, that for most patients it is a far more appropriate setting
for gaining understanding of the impact of traumatic events. Within
such an environment, and with careful timing and pacing, exploration of
abusive childhood experiences may be carried out safely. The purpose
of such exploration is not the forensic documentation of facts, but
the construction of an integrated, personally meaningful narrative
that helps free the patient from the persistent noxious effects of
traumatic events in the distant past. . . Future clinical research is
needed in order systematically to document treatment outcome and
establish preferred modalities of psychotherapy for patients with
histories of childhood trauma" (pp.568-569).
Three tables from the paper:
Table 1 Continuity of Memory
|
| Continuity of Memory |
Number of patients |
% of Total
|
| Continuous recall |
41 |
53 |
| Continuous memory and delayed recall |
13 |
17 |
| Complete amnesia and delayed recall |
12 |
16 |
| Uninformative charts |
11 |
14 |
| Total |
77 |
100 |
Table 2
Precipitants to Delayed Recall of Childhood Trauma
|
| Type of Precipitant |
Patients with Delayed Recall (n = 25) |
%
|
| Trauma-specific reminder |
12 |
48 |
| Recent life crises/milestone |
10 |
40 |
| Psychotherapy |
7 |
28 |
| New information from another person |
5 |
20 |
| Change in close relationship |
5 |
20 |
| Abstinence from drugs or alcohol |
5 |
20 |
| Altered state experience |
5 |
20 |
| Unspecified precipitant |
4 |
16 |
| Illness or injury |
2 |
8 |
| Book, article, or TV program |
2 |
8 |
Table 4
Sources of Memory Confirmation
|
| Confirmation Source |
Number of Patients |
% of Total
|
| Indirect witness (e.g., family member
knew of abuse) |
12 |
16 |
| Idiosyncratic sources |
11 |
14 |
| Direct witness (e.g., family member witnessed
abuse) |
10 |
13 |
| Disclosure by another victim of same
perpetrator |
10 |
13 |
| Multiple sources |
10 |
13 |
| Perpetrator charged with similar crime |
6 |
8 |
| Indirect evidence (e.g., medical record
of injuries) |
4 |
5 |
| Physical evidence |
1 |
1 |
| Admisssion by perpetrator |
1 |
1 |
Contents
Ross Cheit
Ross Cheit is a political scientist at Brown University who
conducts important research on sexual abuse and public policy in
the United States. He maintains the
Recovered Memory Project, a Web site with an archive of corroborated
cases of recovered memories of sexual abuse. The
Recovered Memory Project Archive includes cases in which sexual abuse had
gone on for years occurrences still claimed to be impossible by
those now unable to deny the existence of recovered memories. Cheit
provides the criteria for inclusion in the Archive and invites Web-based
submission of additional cases, as well as criticism and contrary evidence.
It's an extremely valuable Web site, and I strongly encourage you to educate
yourself there especially if you're still skeptical about the
reality of recovered memories of abuse.
Here's an outline of the Archive's 80 Corroborated Cases of Recovered Memory:
- 38 Cases from Legal Proceedings
- 19 Clinical Cases and other Academic/Scientific Case Studies
- 23 Other Corroborated Cases of Recovered Memory
Contents
Elizabeth Loftus
University of Washington psychologist Elizabeth Loftus is an accomplished
researcher with expertise in eyewitness testimony, particularly how
the memories of crime witnesses can be distorted by post-event questioning.
Loftus is a prominent spokesperson for the False Memory Syndrome Foundation,
and her views have by and large been very well received by the mass media
in the United States. Loftus also testifies as an expert witness on the behalf of people accused
of child abuse on the basis of recovered memories. She has co-authored a
book entitled The Myth of Repressed Memory.
You've probably
heard of Dr. Loftus, and seen her quoted approvingly and uncritically in
the popular media. No doubt, as reported in the media, she has prevented
some wrongly accused people from being unjustly convicted. She has also
played a valuable role by bringing attention and accountability to bear on
some irresponsible practices by some incompetent therapists. Yet Dr. Loftus
has also claimed that recovered memory is a "myth," and that the majority
of such memories are false and implanted by therapists.
Unfortunately, thus far reporters and
journalists have almost completely failed to critically evaluate her
claims. Nor have they addressed three crucial facts about her work:
- Loftus herself conducted and published a study in which nearly one
in five women who reported childhood sexual abuse also reported
completely forgetting the abuse for some period of time and recovering
the memory of it later.
- Loftus misrepresented the facts of a legal case in a scholarly paper and, after finally apologizing to the victim of her misrepresentations, continued to promote the article with falsehoods. (See Consider the Evidence for Elizabeth Loftus' Scholarship and Accuracy, by Jennifer Hoult, whose case Loftus misrepresented.)
- Loftus is aware that those who study traumatic memory have for
several years, based on a great deal of research and clinical experience,
used the construct of dissociation to account for the majority of recovered
memories. However, she continues to focus on and attack
"repression" and "repressed memories," which has the effect of confusing
and misleading many people.
Here is the study almost never mentioned by Dr. Loftus or the media:
Loftus, E.F., Polonsky, S., & Fullilove, M. T. (1994).
Memories of childhood sexual abuse: Remembering and repressing.
Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 67-845.
Abstract: "Women involved in out-patient treatment for substance
abuse were interviewed to examine their recollections of
childhood sexual abuse. Overall, 54% of the women reported a history
of childhood sexual abuse. The majority
(81.1%) remembered all or part of the abuse their whole lives;
19% reported they forgot the abuse for a period of time, and later
the memory returned. Women who remembered the abuse their whole
lives reported a clearer memory, with a more detailed picture. They
also reported greater intensity of feelings at the time the abuse
happened. Women who remembered the abuse their whole lives did not
differ from others in terms of the violence of the abuse or whether
the abuse was incestuous. These data bear on current discussions
concerning the extent to which repression is a common way of coping
with child sexual abuse trauma, and also bear on some widely held
beliefs about the correlates of repression."
If you read this paper (and I strongly encourage
you to do so, especially if you are presenting this issue to others),
you will find that Loftus devotes most of it to attacking the construct
of repression. If you read this paper, you
will probably find it interesting and ironic that Loftus, after her
sustained attack on the construct of repression, uses it to explain
the recovered memories of her own study's subjects. If you read this paper
and some of the other works cited on this page, you will understand that
experts in psychological trauma would not explain the recovered memories
of her research subjects in that way, but in terms of dissociation.
Here are the findings at issue:
"Forgetting was associated with a different quality of memory,
compared to those who did not forget. Forgetting was associated with
a current memory that was deteriorated in some respects. The
deteriorated memory was less clear; it contained less of a
'picture,' and the remembered intensity of feelings at the time
of the abuse was less" (p.79).
Notice the use of the word "deteriorated" to describe memory
characteristics that most trauma specialists would describe as
"dissociative." The principle that initially whole memories
deteriorate over time is derived from research on nontraumatic
memory. In contrast, just as dissociation involves a fragmentation
of experience during abuse, subsequent memories tend to appear as
fragments too from the beginning. Thus, if a subject had dissociated
during the abuse experience, such fragmentation would likely cause
her memory to be "less clear," and to involve less of a "picture."
Further, dissociative fragmentation during abuse typically involves
a defensive attempt to split (dis-associate) physical and emotional
pain from one's conscious experience. This could explain the finding
that the women who had forgotten for some time, compared to those who
had not, remembered the intensity of their feelings being less
during the abuse. But Loftus and her colleagues, understandably
wedded to their traditional model of memory and either unable or
unwilling to apply the construct of dissociation, can only characterize
such memories as "deteriorated."
Ironically, this leads Loftus to use repression as an
explanation for these lost memories though no psychological trauma expert
would do so:
"Suppose instead we define repression more conservatively. . . .
Just under one fifth of the women reported that they forgot the
abuse for a period of time and later regained the memory. One could
argue that this means that robust repression was not especially
prevalent in our sample" (p.80).
In summary:
- Loftus has conducted and published research which calls into
question her public statements on recovered memories; her own study
demonstrated that the conditions of amnesia and delayed recall
for sexual abuse do exist.
- She has relentlessly attacked the construct of repression in
her scholarly work, in her expert testimony to judges and juries,
and in her statements to the media; this behavior causes many
uninformed people to believe she is arguing that the conditions
of amnesia and delayed recall for sexual abuse do not exist.
- She has misrepresented the facts of a legal case in a scholarly paper and, after finally apologizing to the victim of her misrepresentations, continued to promote the article riddled with falsehoods (see Consider the Evidence for Elizabeth Loftus' Scholarship and Accuracy)
- She is aware that experts on traumatic and recovered memories,
when they do employ explanatory constructs, use dissociation much
more than repression to understand these phenomena.
- She has used repression to explain recovered memories reported
by subjects in her own research, though experts in traumatic memory
would argue that they are more likely dissociative in nature.
- For most of you, this is the first time you are learning these facts,
because most members of the popular media addressing this issue have
note done their homework or made any of these facts known. (For
more on the unreliability and poor track record of the popular
media on this issue, see Mike Stanton's piece in the Columbia Journalism
Review, U-Turn on Memory
Lane).
Contents
DSM-IV : The Diagnosis of
Dissociative Amnesia
The Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders, currently in its fourth edition
(DSM-IV), is the "bible" of psychiatric diagnosis.
Decisions about treatment, communication among mental health
professionals, and whole traditions of psychiatric research depend
on use of the DSM system. Insurance companies will not
pay for treatment unless the client has a DSM diagnosis.
While it's true that developing diagnostic categories can be an inexact
science, and that some disorders have come and gone, years
of empirical research and clinical observation go into each subsequent
revision of this document. In short, if the
diagnosis of Dissociative Amnesia exists in DSM-IV, it's likely
there for good reasons.
There are often politicized battles among different groups of
psychiatrists and psychologists invested in certain diagnostic
approaches, and certain diagnoses are contested by some clinicians and
researchers. But two characteristics of DSM itself, which stem
from the nature of the revision process, are particularly relevant
here:
- Since the 1970s the DSM approach to diagnosis
has been highly descriptive; that is, diagnostic categories and
their revisions are grounded in empirical evidence and observable phenomena,
not theoretical constructs involving assumptions about causal
mechanisms (though in the case of trauma-induced disorders, to some extent
this cannot be avoided).
- Because committees and decisions tend to be dominated by older,
"establishment" psychiatrists, the DSM is a quite
conservative document.
Both of these characteristics of DSM have
clear implications for the diagnosis of Dissociative Amnesia:
- "Dissociative Amnesia" is a descriptive diagnosis that
adheres closely to empirical data and clinically observed symptomology
(there is no theory-laden diagnosis of "Repressive Amnesia," and it was
never even considered).
- "Dissociative Amnesia" did not enter the DSM diagnostic system
because a small group of ignorant and radical therapists hijacked the
DSM-revision process. (The Working Group on Dissociative
Disorders included, among others, David Spiegel, a Stanford psychiatrist and
researcher whose work has been funded by the National Institutes of Health
and the MacArthur Foundation; see the pre-DSM-IV paper
he wrote with Etzel Cardena, in which they review empirical research on trauma
and dissociation and offer recommendations for DSM-IV dissociative
diagnoses [Spiegel & Cardena, 1991, "Disintegrated Experience: The
Dissociative Disorders Revisited," Journal of Abnormal Psychology,
100, 366-378]).
Please note: Many clinicians have worked
with clients who were doing well until returning memories sent them
into treatment. As indicated below, to have the disorder
of Dissociative Amnesia a person must experience distress or
impairment because he or she cannot remember past (traumatic)
events. Thus people can experience dissociative amnesia for memories of
childhood sexual abuse without having this disorder.
The below excerpts from DSM-IV clarify the
nature of dissociation and show just how accepted this psychological
construct is in the field of psychiatry. For starters, the same
scientific progress which has led to increasing reliance on the construct
of dissociation also brought about the change of the disorder's name from
the vague "Psychogenic Amnesia" to the more accurately descriptive
"Dissociative Amnesia" in DSM-IV.
"Dissociative Disorders
"The essential feature of the
Dissociative Disorders is a disruption of the usually integrated
functions of consciousness, memory, identity, or perception of the
environment. The disturbance may be sudden or gradual,
transient or chronic. The following disorders are included in this
section:
"Dissociative
Amnesia is characterized by an inability to recall important personal
information, usually of a traumatic or stressful nature, that is too
extensive to be explained by ordinary forgetfulness" (p.477).
"300.12 Dissociative Amnesia
(formerly Psychogenic Amnesia)
"Diagnostic Features
"The essential feature of Dissociative Amnesia
is an inability to recall important personal information, usually of
a traumatic or stressful nature, that is too extensive to be explained
by normal forgetfulness (Criterion A). This disorder involves a
reversible memory impairment in which memories of personal experience
cannot be retrieved in a verbal form (or, if temporarily retrieved,
cannot be wholly retained in consciousness). The disturbance
does not occur exclusively during the course of Dissociative Identity
Disorder [formerly Multiple Personality Disorder], Dissociative Fugue,
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, Acute Stress Disorder, or Somatization
Disorder and is not due to the direct physiological effects of a
substance or a neurological or other general medical condition
(Criterion B). The symptoms must cause clinically significant distress
or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of
functioning (Criterion C).
"Dissociative Amnesia
most commonly presents as a retrospectively reported gap or series of
gaps in recall for aspects of the individual's life history. These gaps
are usually related to traumatic or extremely stressful events. Some
individuals may have amnesia for episodes of self-mutilation, violent
outbursts, or suicide attempts. Less commonly, Dissociative Amnesia
presents as a florid episode with sudden onset. This acute form is
more likely to occur during wartime or in response to a natural
disaster" (p.478).
"Prevalence
"In recent years in the United States, there has been an increase in
reported cases of Dissociative Amnesia that involves previously forgotten
early childhood traumas. This increase has been subject to very different
interpretations. Some believe that the greater awareness of the diagnosis
among mental health professionals has resulted in the identification of
cases that were previously undiagnosed. In contrast, others believe that
the syndrome has been overdiagnosed in individuals who are highly
suggestible" (p.479).
The above paragraph was written in 1993, prior to the publication of
nearly all of the more than 85 research studies of amnesia and delayed
recall that have now been published.
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistic
manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Contents
Journal of Traumatic Stress
Special Issue: Traumatic Memory Research
This October 1995 special issue is an important and rich
resource. I have provided an excerpt of Editor Bonnie Green's
introduction, and abstracts of relevant papers. A version
of the entire paper by van der Kolk and Fisler is accessible via hyperlink
to David Baldwin's Trauma Information Pages. Finally, if you want a copy
of this journal, ordering information appears at the end of this
section.
Special Issue: Traumatic Memory Research. Journal
of Traumatic Stress, Volume 8, Number 4, October,
1995.
Contents and Abstracts
Green, B. L. Introduction to special issue on traumatic
memory research.
Excerpt: "The present issue of
JTS is dedicated to the topic of research on traumatic
memory. While a few of the articles fall slightly outside of this
overall designation, all articles were seen to be pertinent to
clinicians and scholars who study and treat individuals with a
history of traumatic exposure. The issue is sparked, to some extent,
by the controversy raging within and between mental health professionals
and academics about whether individuals can 'forget' traumatic events
in their pasts, and whether they can 'remember' events that never took
place. While the issue is not focused on this controversy per se,
it was undertaken to inform clinicians and researchers about a variety
of topics related to traumatic memory, 'recovered' or otherwise" (p.501).
van der Kolk, B., & Fisler, R.
Dissociation and
the fragmentary nature of traumatic memories: Overview and exploratory
study.
Abstract: "Since trauma arises from an inescapable stressful
event that overwhelms people's coping mechanisms, it is uncertain to
what degree the results of laboratory studies of ordinary events are
relevant to the understanding of traumatic memories. This paper reviews
the literature on differences between recollections of stressful and of
traumatic events. It then reviews the evidence implicating dissociation
as the central pathogenic mechanism that gives rise to posttraumatic
stress disorder (PTSD). A systematic exploratory
study of 46 subjects with PTSD indicated that traumatic memories
were retrieved, at least initially, in the form of dissociated
mental imprints of sensory and affective elements of the
traumatic experience: as visual, olfactory, affective, auditory,
and kinesthetic experiences. Over time, subjects reported the
gradual emergence of a personal narrative that can be properly
referred to as 'explicit memory.' The implications of these
findings for understanding the nature of traumatic memories are
discussed."
Read excerpts from this paper.
Bremner, J. D., Krystal, J. H., & Charney, D. S. Functional
neuroanatomical correlates of the effects of stress on memory.
Abstract: "Recently there has been an increase in interest in the
relationship between stress and memory. Brain regions which are involved
in memory function also effect the stress response. Traumatic stress
results in changes in these brain regions; alterations in these brain
regions in turn may mediate symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder
(PTSD). Neural mechanisms which are relevant to the effects of stress
on memory, such as fear conditioning, stress sensitization, and extinction,
are reviewed in relation to their implications for PTSD. Special topics
including neural mechanisms in dissociation, neurobiological approaches
to the validity of childhood memories as they apply to controversies over
the "False Memory Syndrome," and implications of the effects of stress on
memory for psychotherapy, are also reviewed. The
findings discussed in this paper are consistent with the formulation
that stress-induced alterations in brain regions and systems involved
in memory may underlie many of the symptoms of PTSD, as well as
dissociative amnesia, seen in survivors of traumatic stress."
Fivush, R., & Schwarzmueller, A. Say it once again: Effects of
repeated questions on children's event recall.
Abstract: "In this paper, we review research examining the
influences of repeated questioning on children's event recall. Issues
addressed include how children's free recall changes across multiple
recounts of the same event, whether responding to specific questions
about an event affects subsequent responses to those same questions, and
whether there are developmental differences in how children respond to
repeated questioning. Both naturalistic studies of conversational
remembering and more controlled studies using standardized interviews
are discussed. Effects of repeated questioning both within and across
interviews are assessed. In integrating the research findings, we present
a developmental framework for understanding the effects of repeated
questioning that relies on children's developing memory and narrative
skills as well as their social understanding of the recall context."
Excerpt: "Certainly, when children are
abused, they are often sworn to secrecy, or even threatened with
aversive consequences if they tell. In these kinds of situations, what
happens to memory? Given the theoretical framework laid out here,
we would predict that these memories may become especially difficult to
retrieve and recall. If young children are dependent
to some extent on talking about events with others who help them organize
their verbal recount, which in turn leads to long-term retention of these
events, then it seems quite likely that if children are not given the
opportunity to engage in this kind of verbal work, their memories of
the event would not be as good as memories of events that are discussed.
Indeed, Goodman [et al.] (1994) recently reported results that support this
prediction [Consciousness & Cognition, 3,
369-394]. They examined children's memories
for a painful medical procedure involving catheterization and voiding.
Those children whose mothers subsequently talked with them about
their experience had more accurate memories of the event than
children whose mothers did not discuss the event. More research
focusing on the consequences of discussing or not discussing
experiences on the fate of these event memories is clearly
necessary. This is a critical question, both for a theoretical
understanding of the role of rehearsal on memory, as well as applied
issues concerning children's memories for abusive experiences, and
adults' ability to recall abusive experiences from their childhood"
(pp.576-577).
Ornstein, P. A. Children's long-term retention of salient personal
experiences.
Tromp, S., Koss, M. P., & Tharan, M. Are rape memories different? A
comparison of rape, other unpleasant, and pleasant memories among
employed women.
Abstract: "The study examined empirically-measured memory
characteristics, compared pleasant and unpleasant intense memories as
well as rape and other unpleasant memories, and determined whether
rape memories exhibited significantly more "flashbulb' characteristics.
Data consisted of responses to a mailed survey of women employees of
a medical center (N = 1,037) and a university (N = 2,142). Pleasant
and unpleasant memories were differentiated by feelings, consequences,
and level of unexpectedness. The most powerful discriminator of rape
from other unpleasant memories was the degree to which they were less
clear and vivid, contained a less meaningful order, were less
well-remembered, and were less thought and talked about. Few
'flashbulb' characteristics discriminated among memory types.
Implications for clinical work with rape survivors were discussed."
Elliott, D. M., & Briere, J. Posttraumatic stress associated with
delayed recall of sexual abuse: A general population study.
Abstract: "This study examined delayed recall of childhood
sexual abuse in a stratified random sample of the general population
(N = 505). Of participants who reported a history
of sexual abuse, 42% described some period of time when they had
less memory of the abuse than they did at the time of data
collection. No demographic differences were found between
subjects with continuous recall and those who reported delayed
recall. However, delayed recall was associated with the use of
threats at the time of the abuse. Subjects who had recently recalled
aspects of their abuse reported particularly high levels of posttraumatic
symptomatology and self difficulties (as measured by the IES, SCL, and
TSI) at the time of data collection compared to other subjects."
Williams, L. M. Recovered memories of abuse in women with documented
child sexual victimization histories.
Abstract: "This study provides evidence
that some adults who claim to have recovered memories of sexual
abuse recall actual events that occurred in childhood. One
hundred twenty-nine women with documented histories of sexual
victimization in childhood were interviewed and asked about abuse
history. Seventeen years following the initial report of the abuse,
80 of the women recalled the victimization. One
in 10 women (16% of those who recalled the abuse) reported that at
some time in the past they had forgotten about the abuse.
Those with a prior period of forgetting the
women with 'recovered memories' were younger at the time of abuse
and were less likely to have received support from their mothers than
the women who reported that they had always remembered their
victimization. The women who had recovered memories and those
who had always remembered had the same number of discrepancies when their
accounts of the abuse were compared to the reports from the early
1970's."
Read an excerpt from this paper.
Foa, E. B., Molnar, C., & Cashman, L. Change in rape narratives during
exposure therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder.
Rogers, M. L. Factors influencing recall of childhood sexual abuse.
Wolfe, J. Trauma, traumatic memory, and research: Where do we go from
here?
To purchase a copy of this issue, send a personal check to:
Plenum Publishing
233 Spring Street
New York, New York 10013
Attn: Back Issues
It's 225 pages, $23.45 for individuals, and $67 for institutions.
If you have questions, call the Back Issues Dept. at
(212) 620-8069.
Contents
John Briere
Psychologist John Briere, of the University of Southern
California (USC) Medical School, is a highly respected researcher
and clinician in the field of traumatic stress studies. He has
written numerous articles and several books on the lasting effects
of child sexual abuse and the treatment of adults sexually abused
in childhood. These include the papers below, which report
research studies on amnesia for and delayed recall of memories of
child sexual abuse.
Briere, J., & Conte, J. (1993). Self-reported amnesia for abuse
in adults molested as children. Journal of Traumatic Stress,
6, 21-31.
Abstract: "A sample of 450 adult clinical subjects
reporting sexual abuse histories were studied regarding their
repression of sexual abuse incidents. A
total of 267 subjects (59.3%) identified some period in their
lives, before age 18, when they had no memory of their abuse.
Variables most predictive of abuse-related amnesia were greater
current psychological symptoms, molestation at an early age,
extended abuse, and variables reflecting especially violent
abuse (e.g., victimization by multiple perpetrators, having
been physically injured as a result of the abuse, victim fears
of death if she or he disclosed the abuse to others). In contrast,
abuse characteristics more likely to produce psychological conflict
(e.g., enjoyment of the abuse, acceptance of bribes, feelings of
guilt or shame) were not associated with abuse-related amnesia.
The results of this study are interpreted as supporting Freud's
initial 'seduction hypothesis,' as well as more recent theories
of post-traumatic stress disorder."
Elliott, D. M., & Briere, J. (1995). Posttraumatic stress associated
with delayed recall of sexual abuse: A general population study.
Journal of Traumatic Stress, 8, 629-647.
Abstract: "This study examined delayed recall of childhood
sexual abuse in a stratified random sample of the general population
(N = 505). Of participants who reported a history
of sexual abuse, 42% described some period of time when they had less
memory of the abuse than they did at the time of data collection.
No demographic differences were found between subjects with continuous recall and those who reported
delayed recall. However, delayed recall was associated with the use of
threats at the time of the abuse. Subjects who had recently recalled
aspects of their abuse reported particularly high levels of posttraumatic
symptomatology and self difficulties (as measured by the IES, SCL, and
TSI) at the time of data collection compared to other subjects."
Contents
Shirley Feldman-Summers
Psychologist Shirley Feldman-Summers is an independent
practitioner in Washington state, and serves as an expert witness
in civil and criminal cases. The paper below (follow link for full text)
is a research study with data on rates of amnesia and delayed recall for child
abuse experiences among a national sample of psychotherapists.
Feldman-Summers, S., & Pope, K. S. (1994).
The
experience of "forgetting" childhood abuse: A national survey of
psychologists (full text) . Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
62, 636-639.
Abstract: "A national sample of psychologists were asked
whether they had been abused as children and, if so, whether they
had ever forgotten some or all of the abuse. Almost
a quarter of the sample (23.9%) reported childhood abuse, and of
those, approximately 40% reported a period of forgetting some or
all of the abuse. The major findings were that (a) both
sexual and nonsexual abuse were subject to periods of forgetting;
(b) the most frequently reported factor related to recall was
being in therapy; (c) approximately one half
of those who reported forgetting also reported corroboration of the
abuse; and (d) reported forgetting was not related to gender
or age of the respondent but was related to severity of the abuse."
Two tables from the paper:
Table 2
Events, Experiences, or Circumstances That Triggered
Recovery of the Memories of Abuse |
| Experience |
Number of Subjects |
Percentage of Subjects |
| A book, article, lecture, movie, or TV
show reminded me. |
8 |
25.0 |
| Someone who knew about the abuse
reminded me. |
6 |
18.8 |
| In therapy, the memory began to
return. |
18 |
56.2 |
| In a self-help or peer group (i.e.,
not a therapy group), the memory began to return. |
2 |
6.2 |
| Some other event seemed to trigger
or elicit the memory (please describe). |
9 |
28.1 |
| Nothing seemed to be related to my
remembering the abuse. |
3 |
9.4 |
Table 3
Sources That Support, Corroborate, or Confirm the Recovered
Memory of the Abuse |
| Source |
Number of Subjects |
Percentage of Subjects |
| The abuser(s) acknowledged some
or all of the remembered abuse. |
5 |
15.6 |
| Someone who knew about the abuse
told me. |
7 |
21.9 |
| Journals or diaries kept by the
abuser(s) described or referred to the abuse. |
0 |
0.0 |
| My own journals or diaries (that I
had forgotten about) described the abuse. |
2 |
6.2 |
| Someone else reported abuse by the same
perpetrator. |
5 |
15.6 |
| Medical records referred to or described
the abuse. |
2 |
6.2 |
| Court or legal records referred to
or described the abuse. |
0 |
0.0 |
| No support, corroboration, or
confirmation has been found. |
16 |
50 |
Contents
Jennifer Freyd
University of Oregon psychologist Jennifer Freyd has
written an acclaimed book (and an article) in which she advances
her theory of why it is adaptive for some children
not to remember childhood abuse experiences. She focuses on the
issue of betrayal, and argues that the need for mental and
physical survival, not merely the avoidance of painful feelings,
leads children abused by caregivers to block out information
about the abuse. Dr. Freyd and two of her colleagues conducted a study to
test her theory, and the results are reported in a 2001 paper that is
referenced below and available online as a pdf file.
Siver, H., Schooler, J., Freyd, J. J. (2002).
Recovered memories (pdf). In V. S. Ramachandran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the Human Brain (pp. 169-184). New York:
Academic Press.
Excerpt: "We begin by briefly summarizing the proposed social situation in which the current
debate arose. Then, we present a sample of published research that has attempted to document the forgetting
and recovery of memories for childhood sexual abuse. This is followed by a discussion of possible mechanisms
for recovered memories, including ones proposed to be specific to traumatic events and others that are more
standard mechanisms for remembering and forgetting. Finally, we discuss issues of accuracy in recovered memories." (p.170).
Freyd, J. J. (1996).
Betrayal trauma: The logic of forgetting childhood abuse. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press. (Follow link for promotional information at HUP.)
Here are excerpts from the New York Times Book Review:
"Betrayal Trauma is a thoughtful, judicious and thorough
scholarly analysis of a subject that has hitherto generated more heat
than light. . .
"Although the mechanisms involved [in memory loss and
retrieval] are far from fully understood, Ms. Freyd marshals the
psychological, neurological and cognitive-science literature with
impressive skill to suggest several plausible possibilities. Her
work serves as a salutary reminder that if treated as serious
science rather than media hoopla the recovered-memory debate could
provide a significant window on mind-brain relationships; anyone
interested in the latter will find much stimulating material
here. . .
"She has a complex enough case to argue; she argues
it fairly and with virtuoso skill, blending vivid anecdote with
statistical evidence, first-person accounts with research reports,
in a highly literate and engaging style. Partisan passions, alas,
are seldom quenched by reason. But unblinkered readers will surely
agree that Ms. Freyd's book places recovered memories squarely on
the cognitive-science agenda. Her diagnosis of their source may
well turn out to be correct."
- Derek Bickerton, New York Times
Book Review
Freyd, J. (1994). Betrayal trauma: Traumatic amnesia as an
adaptive response to childhood abuse. Ethics & Behavior, 4,
307-329.
Abstract: "Betrayal trauma theory suggests that psychogenic
amnesia is an adaptive response to childhood abuse.
When a parent or other powerful figure
violates a fundamental ethic of human relationships, victims may
need to remain unaware of the trauma not to reduce suffering
but rather to promote survival. Amnesia enables the
child to maintain an attachment with a figure vital to survival,
development, and thriving. Analysis of evolutionary pressures, mental
modules, social cognitions, and developmental needs suggests that the
degree to which the most fundamental human ethics are violated can
influence the nature, form, and process of trauma and responses to the
trauma."
Excerpt: "Child abuse is especially likely to produce a social
conflict or betrayal for the victim. . . Further, there is evidence
that the most devastating psychological effects of child abuse
occur when the victims are abused by a trusted person who was
known to them. . . If a child processed
the betrayal in the normal way, he or she would be motivated to
stop interacting with the betrayer. Instead, he or she essentially
needs to ignore the betrayal. If the betrayer is a primary
caregiver, it is especially essential that the child does not
stop behaving in such a way that will inspire attachment.
For the child to withdraw from a caregiver on which he or she is
dependent would further threaten the child's life, both physically and
mentally. Thus the trauma of child abuse by
its very nature requires that information about the abuse be blocked
from mental mechanisms that control attachment and attachment behavior.
The information that gets blocked may be partial (for instance,
blocking emotional responses only), but in many cases partial blocking
will lead to a more profound amnesia" (p.312).
Freyd, J.J., DePrince, A.P., & Zurbriggen, E.L. (2001).
Self-reported memory
for abuse depends upon victim-perpetrator relationship. Journal of Trauma &
Dissociation, 2, 5-17.
Abstract: "We present preliminary results from the Betrayal Trauma
Inventory (BTI) testing predictions from betrayal trauma theory (Freyd 1994,
1996, in press) about the relationship between amnesia and betrayal by a
caregiver. The BTI assesses trauma history using behaviorally defined events
in the domains of sexual, physical, and emotional childhood abuse, as well as
other lifetime traumatic events. When participants endorse an abuse experience,
follow-up questions assess a variety of factors including memory impairment
and perpetrator relationship. Preliminary results support
our prediction that abuse perpetrated by a caregiver is related to less
persistent memories of abuse. This relationship is significant for sexual and
physical abuse. Regression analyses revealed that age was not a
significant predictor of memory impairment and that duration of abuse could
not account for the findings."
Dr. Freyd's web site has
a wealth of helpful and clarifying information on traumatic and recovered memories,
including the following pages:
What is a
Betrayal Trauma? What is Betrayal Trauma Theory? -
What is Shareability?
- What is DARVO?
- What
about Recovered Memories?
Some of Dr. Freyd's most important recent work addresses how media coverage of the recovered memory
debate in general, and certain research studies in particular, confuses and misleads many people: Commentary: Response to 17
February 2003 Media Reports on Loftus' Bugs Bunny Study - Misleading and confusing
media portrayals of memory research
Dr. Freyd and Dr. Chris Brewin organized the
1998 Meeting
on Trauma and Cognitive Science. At the site there is an order form
for a set of 10 tapes of presentations by leading researchers. The conference
was offered by the University of Oregon's Institute of Cognitive and Decision Sciences,
Department of Psychology, and Center for the Study of Women in Society. Its
aim was "to share knowledge and theory relvant to understanding the way in
which trauma interacts with information processing," including "a particular
focus on how traumatic information is encoded, stored, and later retrieved
from memory." The conference had a research focus, but also addressed the
significant ethical, clinical, and societal implications of the researchers'
work. Speakers represented a broad spectrum of research approaches and points
of view. Trauma and Cognitive Science is a book
based on the conference.
Contents
Chris Brewin Chris R. Brewin, Ph.D., is a Professor and Co-director of the Cognition,
Emotion and Trauma Group, in the Department of Psychology, Royal Holloway University
of London. He is a clinical psychologist specializing in trauma and memory.
In addition to publishing several studies on intrusive memories with his
colleagues, Dr. Brewin is the first author of two important review articles that bring the latest
cognitive science theory and research to the issue of traumatic memories,
including recovered memories. Both are featured below.
Brewin, C. R., & Andrews, B. (1998). Recovered memories of
trauma: Phenomenology and cognitive mechanisms. Clinical Psychology
Review, 4, 949-970.
Abstract: "We outline four current explanations for the
reported forgetting of traumatic events, namely repression, dissociation,
ordinary forgetting, and false memory. We then review the clinical and
survey evidence on recovered memories, and consider experimental evidence
that a variety of inhibitory processes are involved in everyday cognitive
activity including forgetting. The data currently available do not allow
any of the four explanations to be rejected, and strongly support the
likelihood that some recovered memories correspond to actual experiences.
We propose replacing the terms repression and
dissociation as explanations of forgetting with an account based on
cognitive science."
Excerpts: "Given that the recovery of essentially accurate memories of
trauma after a period of forgetting is agreed to occur in some cases,
the plausibility of competing accounts of forgetting depends on whether:
(a) clients report active attempts to forget memories or banish them from
consciousness, and the strategies they use to do this; (b) the memories
recalled possess the hallmarks of disrupted encoding, such as fragmentation,
intense sensory and perceptual features, and the experience of reliving
the event in the present; (c) evidence for inhibitory processes can be
found in everyday cognitive tasks; (d) ordinary individuals display a
selective problem in processing negative memories. In the next two sections
of this article, we consider the clinical and experimental evidence
relevant to these issues" (p.953).
"Of particular value is the evidence that
memory recovery can take several forms. Amnesia may be partial or profound,
and individuals can often give accounts of deliberate strategies they use
to banish distressing memories from consciousness. Recovered memories may
be fragemented, emotion-laden, and similar to intrusive memories of the
PTSD patient, or (less often) they may more closely resemble ordinary memories.
These observations suggest that several different kinds of underlying
cognitive processes are likely to be necessary to explain such diverse
phenomena. In search of such processes we now turn to the experimental
literature" (p.958).
"Studies of retrieval inhibition suggest
a mechanism to explain how instructions to forget generated by the self
or others might lead to profound amnesia for an event, which could
subsequently be lifted by exposure to relevant cues.... Retrieval inhibition
may apply to an entire set of items in memory and can explain profound
amnesia. In the case of partial forgetting, however, the individual has
to forget a subset of items from a larger, interrelated item pool, some
of which is accessible to working memory....
"Johnson (1994 [Psychol Bull, 116,
274-292]) argued that once this mixture of [to be forgotten]
and [to be remembered] information was in memory, forgetting could not
be explained solely by representational processes operating on the storage
of information to prevent retrieval. It would additionally have to be
assumed that some material had been partially retrieved but was not fully
processed or expressed because of some decisional processes.... This kind
of model is consistent with reports of partial forgetting in which clients
describe remaining unaware of particular aspects of their trauma by choosing
not to remember them. They typically describe a state of mind in which they
know that they know something, but prefer to remain in ignorance of it....
(pp.963-964)
"Although repression and dissociation have
proved useful in carrying forward the idea of defensive strategies for
forgetting trauma, and can plausibly be used to refer to different types
of forgetting, we argue that neither is adequate to explain recovered
memories of trauma. Use of the term repression has led to confusion
because it can be defined in quite different ways, and dissociation, although
often coexistent with traumatic amnesia, is concerned with alterations in
consciousness rather than specifically with forgetting. Neither concept can
account for the range of empirical data.
"An adequate account of recovered memories
of trauma must explain the large variations both in the degree of prior
amnesia and in the quality of the memories recovered. We have argued that
these variations may be explicable in terms of three processes familiar to
cognitive psychologists, retrieval inhibition, postretrieval decisional
processes, and implicit memory. Also integral to the explanation is the
idea that there are dual representations of trauma in memory, one explicit
and deliberately accessible (verbally accessible memory) and one automatically
triggered by situational cues (situationally accessible memory)" (p.966).
Brewin, C. R., Dalgleish, T., & Joseph, S. (1996). A dual
representation theory of posttraumatic stress disorder. Psychological
Review, 103, 670-686.
Abstract: "A cognitive theory of posttraumatic stress disorder
(PTSD) is proposed that assumes traumas experienced after early childhood
give rise to 2 sorts of memory, 1 verbally accessible and 1 automatically
accessible through appropriate situational cues. These different types of
memory are used to explain the complex phenomenology of PTSD, including the
experiences of reliving the traumatic event and of emotionally processing
the trauma. The theory considers 3 possible outcomes of the emotional
processing of trauma, successful completion, chronic processing, and
premature inhibition of processing We discuss the implications of the
theory for research design, clinical practice, and resolving contradictions
in the empirical data."
Contents
Cynthia Bowman & Elizabeth Mertz
Northwestern University Law professors Cynthia Bowman and
Elizabeth Mertz have written an important paper of interest to
therapists, lawyers and judges concerned with legal and liability
issues in criminal cases based on recovered memories. Their paper
includes an excellent pre-1996 review of the scientific evidence
as well. Directions for ordering a copy follow the excerpt.
Bowman, C. G., & Mertz, E. (1996). A dangerous direction: Legal
intervention in sexual abuse survivor therapy. Harvard Law
Review, 109, 551-639.
Abstract: "In this article, Professors Brown and Mertz
question recent popular and academic commentary that disputes the
validity of all delayed-recall memories of childhood sexual abuse.
They examine one court's decision to allow a father, accused by
his daughter of childhood sexual abuse, to recover malpractice
damages from his daughter's therapist in connection with therapy
during which the daughter recovered memories of the abuse. The authors
argue that such third-party liability is unsound in terms of
established principles of tort doctrine and in terms of public
policy. After a review of the scientific
evidence, the authors further conclude that, although some memories
may be inaccurate, delayed-recall memory can also accurately reflect
that past abuse occurred. Permitting third-party liability against
therapists when accurate memories of abuse surface in therapy gives
abusers a weapon to use against their victims. Because such suits
exclude the party in privy (the client), they effectively erase
the victim's voice. Professors Bowman and Mertz argue that
such a novel extension of third-party liability is at best a misuse
of the court's resources and ultimately harms abuse survivors,
therapists, and the community far more than it helps any wrongfully
accused parents."
Excerpt: "Part I discusses the California case that is the immediate
impetus for this article, Ramona vs. Isabella. Part II
explores existing law relating to therapist liability, discussing
doctrines about third-party liability in tort, medical malpractice
by psychotherapists, and the like. Part III discusses policy issues
raised by the background law. In Part IV, we examine what is known
about the delayed recall of memories involving abuse. Based on this
discussion, we evaluate in Part V the problems involved in translating
psycho/social knowledge into legal standards for the sexual abuse
context and, in Part VI, discuss the implication for survivors' agency
and personhood of permitting third-party suits against their therapists.
We conclude that allowing recovery [of damages] in a case like
Ramona is unsound. Part VII sets forth recommendation
based upon our analysis" (p.555).
To order a copy of this issue, send a check for $9 to:
Harvard Law Review
Gannet House
Harvard University
Cambridge, MA 02138
Contents
Judge Edward Harrington, U.S. District Court
Judge Edward Harrington of the U.S. District Court, District
of Massachusetts, has written an important decision on the validity of
"repressed memory." Judge Harrington based his ruling on those factors
the U.S. Supreme Court has decided must be considered when deciding if
proffered testimony is valid "scientific knowledge," and therefore
reliable. Here are some key passages in the decision:
"After considering these factors, this Court
finds that the reliability of the phenomenon of repressed memory has
been established, and therefore, will permit the plaintiff to introduce
evidence which relates to the plaintiff's recovered memories (p.3).
"In brief, Dr. van der Kolk testified that repressed memories
is not a scientific controversy, but merely a political and
forensic one (p.5).
"Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV,
1994), which is a widely used manual by psychiatrists to define
mental diagnostic categories and is published by the American
Psychiatric Association, also recognizes the concept of repressed
memories (p.7).
"It is important to stress that, in considering
the admissibility of repressed memory evidence, it is not the role of the
Court to rule on the credibility of this individual plaintiff's memories,
but rather on the validity of the theory itself. For the foregoing
reasons, the Court hereby denies the Defendant's Motion in Limine to Exclude
Repressed Memory Evidence. For the law to
reject a diagnostic category generally accepted by those who practice
the art and science of psychiatry would be folly. Rules of law are
not petrified in the past but flow with the current of expanding
knowledge" (p.9).
I have created a Web page with a copy of this decision:
The Validity of Recovered Memory:
Decision of United States District Court, District of
Massachusetts.
Contents
Selected Books on Recovered & Traumatic
Memories
There are now available many good, and some great books on
recovered memories of sexual abuse in particular and traumatic memories
in general. Below is a short list of books that I have found very informative
and thought-provoking. I am confident that these are worthwhile reading
for therapists, students, scientists, lawyers, philosophers and anyone
else interested in the many facets and implications of traumatic
memory.
You can go directly from the book titles to their pages at Amazon.com, which
will give me 5-15% of the price on some purchases (all pages will open in a
new browser window or one already open in the background). I have entered
into this arrangement in association with Amazon.com to cover some costs of
running this website.
Unchained Memories: True Stories of Traumatic Memories, Lost and Found
By Lenore Terr. New York: Basic Books, 1994.
Psychiatrist Lenore Terr University of California's
San Francisco Medical School helped found the field of psychological trauma with
her study of children involved in the Chowchilla kidnapping incident.
In this book, which is accessible to everyone interested in this topic, she
recounts her experiences as a therapist working with people who
have experienced amnesia and delayed recall for traumatic memories.
Written by a competent and ethical therapist and researcher, this book is a
matter of fact response to sweeping generalizations about professionals doing this work.
Recollections of Sexual Abuse: Treatment Principles and Guidelines
By Christine Courtois. New York: Norton, 1999.
Psychologist Christine Courtois is therapist in private practice in Washington, D.C.,
and clinical director of The CENTER: Post-traumatic Disorders Program, at the Psychiatric Institute of Washington. She
has authored ground-breaking books on adults with histories of child sexual abuse and treating incest survivors, conducts
workshops nationally and internationally, and has received many awards for her writing and other work. This
book was written to meet clinicians' needs for balanced educational material on traumatic memories, and proposes guidelines
and principles for treatment, including for dealing with recovered memories. More specifically, as Dr. Courtois writes in her
introduction, "the intent of this book is (1) to provide explanatory material to the working clinician in a form that is accessible as well as
practical; (2) to outline the middle ground and evolving standard of clinical practice and standard of care that encourages the
clinician in a stance of supportive neutrality toward the patient and his/her productions in therapy, a stance that neither
suggests nor suppresses exploration of memories or suspicions of past abuse; and (3) to provide this material to improve
clinical practice and care of patients. . . and as risk management for the clinician" (p. xvii). As many leaders in the traumatic stress
field agree, she has spectacularly achieved these goals, and this book is an invaluable resource for clinicians.
Trauma
and Cognitive Science
Edited by Jennifer J. Freyd & Anne P. DePrince. Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press, 2001.
This book is based on a
ground-breaking 1998 conference hosted by Jennifer Freyd and Chris Brewin, which
brought together clinicians, clinical researchers, cognitive scientists and
neuroscientists, in an effort to bridge gaps across these disciplines and their respective
theoretical frameworks and research methodologies. As indicated by the contents
below, this collection of papers addresses a variety of important issues concerning
recovered memories of abuse and traumatic memories more generally. (This book
contains two papers that I co-authored with Bessel van der Kolk - see links to pdf
files below.)
For the publisher's information/spin on the book, click
here.
You can
order
the book from Amazon (easy if you've ordered from Amazon before, 1-2 weeks for delivery), or directly
from the publisher, The Haworth Press (harder to order, but probably faster delivery):
Phone: 800-429-6784
Email: getinfo@hasworthpressinc.com
Web:
http://www.haworthpressinc.com/store/product.asp?sku=2228
Chapter titles and authors:
- Foreword: Entering the Secret Garden: The Interface of Cognitive
Neuroscience and Trauma Research - Terence M. Keane
- The Meeting of Trauma and Cognitive Science: Facing Challenges and Creating
Opportunities at the Crossroads - Anne P. DePrince & Jennifer J. Freyd
- Exploring the Nature
of Traumatic Memory: Combining Clinical Knowledge with
Laboratory Methods - Bessel A. van der Kolk, James W. Hopper, & Janet E.
Osterman
- Retrieving,
Assessing, and Classifying Traumatic Memories: A Preliminary Report on Three
Case Studies of a New Standardized Method - James W. Hopper & Bessel A. van der Kolk
- A Cognitive Analysis of the Role of Suggestibility in Explaining Memories
for Abuse - Kathy Pezdek
- The Role of the Self in False Memory Creation - Mark A. Oakes & Ira E.
Hyman, Jr.
- Discovering Memories of Abuse in the Light of Meta-Awareness - Jonathan
W. Schooler
- Perspectives on Memory for Trauma and Cognitive Processes Associated with
Dissociative Tendencies - Jennifer J. Freyd & Anne P. DePrince
- A Biological Model for Delayed Recall of Childhood Abuse - J. Douglas Bremner
- Active Forgetting: Evidence for Functional Inhibition as a Source of
Memory Failure - Michael C. Anderson
- Experiential Avoidance and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: A Cognitive
Mediational Model of Rape Recovery - Laura E. Boeschen, Mary P. Koss, Aurelio
Jose Figueredo, & James A. Coan
- Autobiographical Memory Disturbances in Childhood Abuse Survivors - Valerie
J. Edwards, Robyn Fivush, Robert F. Anda, Vincent J. Felitti, & Dale F. Nordenberg
- A Preliminary Report Comparing Trauma-Focused and Present-Focused Group
Therapy Against a Wait-Listed Condition Among Childhood Sexual Abuse Survivors
with PTSD - Catherine Classen, Cheryl Koopman, Kirsten Nevill-Manning, &
David Spiegel
- Dialogue Between Speakers and Attendees at the 1998 Meeting on Trauma and
Cognitive Science: Questions and Answers About Traumatic Memory - Chris R.
Brewin & Bernice Andrews
- Finding a Secret Garden in Trauma Research - Jennifer J. Freyd & Anne
P. DePrince
Memory, Trauma Treatment and the Law
By Daniel Brown, Alan W. Scheflin, & D. Corydon Hammond. New York:
Norton, 1997.
This book is by far the
most comprehensive and acclaimed on this topic.
Brown, Scheflin and Hammond's encyclopedic volume is a remarkably thorough
treatment of many crucial issues, including memory, suggestibility, therapy,
and the law. It is an expensive and massive book, at $100 and over 700 pages,
and will be an authoritative work for years to come.
Chapter titles:
- The False Memory Debate
- The Contours of the False Memory Debate
- The Nature of Memory
- Laboratory Simulation Studies on Memory for Negative Emotional Events
- Personal Memories
- Memory for Events of Impact
- Trauma Memory
- Misinformation Suggestibility
- Interrogatory Suggestion and Coercive Persuasion
- Hypnosis and Memory: Analysis and Critique of Research
- A Critical Evaluation of Research on Emotion and Memory
- The False Logic of the False Memory Controversy and the Irrational
Element in Scientific Research on Memory
- Phase-Oriented Trauma Treatment
- Trauma Treatment and the Standard of Care
- Suing Therapists
- Repressed Memory and the Law
- Distingushing between True and False Memories
- Hypnosis and the Law
Recovered
Memories of Abuse: Assessment, Therapy, Forensics
By Kenneth Pope & Laura Brown. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association, 1996.
This highly acclaimed book is an excellent practical resource for
therapists, lawyers, and expert witnesses.
Three examples of the praise this book has received:
"Pope and Brown have presented a careful review of memory science that both
appreciates complexity and cautions against overgeneralization. . . . The
book presents very pragmatic guidelines for clinicians that serve to improve
the standard of care and decrease liability risk. . . . This is a very
sane, ethical, and compassionate approach to a very controversial and often
irrational debate."
- Daniel Brown, Ph.D., ABPH, Harvard Medical School
"Essential reading for lawyers and expert witnesses, this landmark book is
scientifically grounded, carefully researched, and thankfully! of great
practical use. The consent forms, deposition and cross-examination
questions, outlines for reviewing treatment plans, and scrupulously fair
examinations of the major controversies are major contributions. Avoiding
the polarizing polemics and limited points of view that mar so much of the
work in this area, this is the best book on this topic."
- Gary Sampley, Esq., Attorney at Law
"This is a book that a clinician, researcher, or trainee cannot afford to
miss. . . . Only with this type of comprehensive information can we begin
to appreciate the complexities of therapeutic and legal issues surrounding
child sexual abuse."
- Gail Elizabeth Wyatt, Ph.D., Department of
Psychiatry, UCLA
Betrayal Trauma: The Logic of Forgetting Childhood
Abuse
By Jennifer Freyd. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996.
Freyd is a University of Oregon research
psychologist. In this acclaimed book she advances her theory of why it
is adaptive for some children not to remember childhood
abuse experiences. Freyd focuses on the issue of
betrayal, and argues that the need for mental and physical survival,
not merely the avoidance of painful feelings, leads children abused by
caregivers to block out information about the abuse.
Here are excerpts from the New York Times Book Review:
"Betrayal Trauma is a thoughtful, judicious and thorough
scholarly analysis of a subject that has hitherto generated more heat
than light. . .
Although the mechanisms involved [in memory loss and
retrieval] are far from fully understood, Ms. Freyd marshals the
psychological, neurological and cognitive-science literature with
impressive skill to suggest several plausible possibilities.
Her work serves as a salutary reminder that if treated as serious
science rather than media hoopla the recovered-memory debate could
provide a significant window on mind-brain relationships; anyone
interested in the latter will find much stimulating material
here. . .
She has a complex enough case to argue; she argues
it fairly and with virtuoso skill, blending vivid anecdote with
statistical evidence, first-person accounts with research reports,
in a highly literate and engaging style. Partisan passions, alas,
are seldom quenched by reason. But unblinkered readers will surely
agree that Ms. Freyd's book places recovered memories squarely on
the cognitive-science agenda. Her diagnosis of their source may
well turn out to be correct."
- Derek Bickerton, New York Times
Book Review
Sexual Abuse Recalled: Treating Trauma in the Era
of the Recovered Memory Debate
Edited by Judith Alpert. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, 1995.
This collection of
thoughtful and informative essays addresses the range of clinical issues
encountered in this work, from therapeutic practice and ethics, to
scientific bases and legal concerns. Contributors include Judith Alpert,
Bessel van der Kolk, Laura Brown, and Daniel Brown. Richard Kluft, an
expert on dissociation and dissociative identity disorder, says this about
the book:
"Dr. Alpert and her contributors have produced a
foundation resource document for therapists who labor to console and
heal patients struggling with issues of trauma. By restraining from
indulgence in unseemly polemics. . . they bring thoughtful insight to the
study of recollections of sexual traumatization and to the management of
such memories in treatment. This is not a gratifying text for the true
believer who seeks confirmation of a particular point of view, but it is
an excellent text for the honest clinician or scholar willing to grapple
with an extremely complex and challenging problem in a candid and
circumspect manner. We owe Dr. Alpert and her colleagues a debt of
gratitude."
Holocaust Testimonies: The Ruins of Memory
By Lawrence Langer. New Haven, CN: Yale University Press, 1991.
Boston University scholar Lawrence Langer
has spent years studying videotapes from the Holocaust Archive at Yale
University. Langer's research has focused on Holocaust
survivors' oral testimonies. Based on this work he has formulated a
distinction between what he refers to as "common memory" and "deep memory."
Langer's insights may shed light on memories of the most extreme forms of
child abuse.
Common memory has meaningful continuity with the present
for its possessor, and can be linked to the present by a storyline.
Common memory can be communicated to a listener who can imagine a
relevant past in common with the speaker. It can be communicated to
another as a narrative that is, by its nature, comprehensible to its
audience. In contrast, deep memory cannot be integrated into a
narrative continuous with the present, even by its possessor. Indeed,
deep memory ultimately cannot be understood by another person, since a
listener has no basis for imagining the past it depicts.
Langer conveys the experience of watching videotapes of oral
Holocaust testimonies:
"We wrestle with the beginnings of a permanently unfinished tale, full of
incomplete intervals, faced by the spectacle of a faltering witness often
reduced to a distressed silence by the overwhelming solicitations of deep
memory. Witnesses' chronic frustration and skepticism about the audience's
ability to understand their testimony is almost a premise of these encounters.
Written texts, on the other hand, are designed to avert this
possibility otherwise, one assumes, they would not be published. Indeed,
the initial problem surfacing in these oral testimonies with sufficient
regularity to call it a 'theme' is exactly the opposite: whether anything
can be meaningfully conveyed" (1991, p.21).
The Recovered Memory/False Memory Debate
Edited by Kathy Pezdek & William Banks. San Diego: Academic Press, 1996.
This collection of
scholarly papers, including a number of research studies, presents work
representing a range of opinion. It is a good resource for
therapists, lawyers, graduate and college students, and anyone else
interested in these issues.
Trauma: Explorations in Memory
Edited by Cathy Caruth. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University
Press, 1995.
Cathy Caruth of Yale University's English
Department edited two 1991 special issues of American Imago, and
this book presents the same material. These are
historically, culturally and philosophically rich essays on psychological
trauma and traumatic memory, from child abuse to Holocaust
experiences.
Special Issue: Psychoanalysis, Culture, and Trauma, I.
American Imago, 48(1).
Special Issue: Psychoanalysis, Culture, and Trauma, II.
American Imago, 48(2).
Contents
Media Coverage of Recovered Memories
This short section provides links to two very informative and clarifying articles and a recent presentation.
The first article, published by Mike Stanton in the 1997 Columbia Journalism Review,
traces the stark reversal in the major media's portrayal of recovered memories
of sexual abuse, which corresponded to the rise of the False Memory Syndrome Foundation
and its (ongoing) aggressive public relations efforts. The second, a February 2003
online commentary by cognitive psychologist Jennifer Freyd, lucidly demonstrates
how the media continues to give the public biased, incomplete and deceptive accounts
of research by those who claim it is easy to implant false
memories of sexual abuse and that recovered memories are likely false. Dr. Freyd's 2004 presentation addresses
these same issues and presents recent research on the effects of such media coverage.
U-Turn on Memory
Lane, by Mike Stanton, in the July/August 1997 issue of Columbia Journalism Review.
Commentary: Response to 17
February 2003 Media Reports on Loftus' Bugs Bunny Study, by Jennifer J. Freyd,
University of Oregon cognitive psychologist.
Misleading and confusing
media portrayals of memory research, a presentation by Jennifer J. Freyd at the Annual Meeting of the American
Association for the Advancement of Science, February 2004.
Contents
Additional Resources
If you need immediate information about and/or connection to
resources in your own community in the United States, here are three 24-hour
toll-free hotlines that you can call:
Childhelp USA's National Child Abuse Hotline
1-800-422-4453
(1-800-4ACHILD)
Childhelp USA is a non-profit organization "dedicated to meeting the physical,
emotional, educational, and spiritual needs of abused and neglected children."
Its programs and services include this hotline, which children can call with
complete anonymity and confidentiality. To know what to expect when you call,
see How We
Help. From the site: "The Childhelp USAź National Child Abuse Hotline
is open 7 days a week, 24 hours a day. Don't be afraid to call. No one is silly
or unimportant to us. If something is bothering you or you want information, CALL!"
To learn more about reporting child abuse or neglect in your state, see
Report Child Abuse.
Rape Abuse & Incest National Network
1-800-656-4673 (HOPE)
RAINN is a national network of rape crisis centers. This is an automated
service that links callers to the nearest rape crisis center automatically.
Rape crisis centers are staffed with trained volunteers and paid staff
members who also have knowledge of sexual abuse issues and services (though
sometimes they are not adequately prepared to refer males with abuse histories). All
calls are confidential, and callers may remain anonymous if they wish.
National Domestic Violence/Abuse
Hotline
1-800-799-SAFE
1-800-799-7233
1-800-787-3224 TDD
This is a 24-hour-a-day hotline, staffed by trained volunteers
who are ready to connect people with emergency help in their own
communities, including emergency services and shelters.
The staff can also provide information and referrals for a variety of
non-emergency services, including counseling for adults and children,
and assistance in reporting abuse. They have an extensive database of
domestic violence treatment providers in all US states and territories.
Many staff members speak languages besides English, and they have
24-hour access to translators for approximately 150 languages. For
the hearing impaired, there is a TDD number. This is a good resource
for people who are experiencing or have experienced domestic violence
or abuse, or who suspect that someone they know is being abused (though
it is not perfect, and may not have the best number in your area).
All calls to the hotline are confidential, and callers may remain
anonymous if they wish.
If you are looking for a therapist or counselor in the United States, even if only
for a couple of consultations, the Sidran Foundation has an extensive list of
therapists and clinics around the country that specialize in treating people
with histories of severe child abuse. See their page
About the Help Desk.
If you want to start learning and practicing the self-regulation skills essential
to managing painful memories, or to build on progress you are already making, I
strongly recommend that you get this book:
Growing
Beyond Survival: A Self-Help Toolkit for Managing Traumatic Stress, by Elizabeth Vermilyea.
To learn more about the book and/or order it directly from the publisher (for a higher price
than Amazon), go to the Growing
Beyond Survival page of the Sidran Press catalog.
For more links to child abuse resources, go from
the bottom of this page to "Child Abuse: Statistics, Research,
and Resources." There are great resources there that
are not here.
Trauma
and Memory, by Victoria Banyard, Ph.D., a Professor of Psychology at the
University of New Hampshire, is a concise, 3-page review of research on
trauma and memory. The Fall 2000 issue of the
PTSD
Research Quarterly, a publication of the National Center for PTSD, it covers
recent developments and emerging trends, and is supplemented by selected
abstracts and additional citations.
The web site of Ken Pope has several articles on
the recovered memory/false memory debate, which can be ordered for free. Pope
is an accomplished psychologist who has published many articles and a book on
the scientific and therapeutic issues involved. See the
Award Address and Other Articles on
the Recovered Memory Controversy section of his page, and follow links
for the article reprint ordering form.
University of Orgegan cognitive psychologist Jennifer
J. Freyd's web site has a wealth of helpful and clarifying information on
traumatic and recovered memories, including the following pages:
What is a
Betrayal Trauma? What is Betrayal Trauma Theory? -
What is Shareability?
- What is DARVO?
- What
about Recovered Memories?
You can order a set of 10 tapes of presentations by leading researchers
at the 1998 Meeting
on Trauma and Cognitive Science, organized by Drs. Jennifer Freyd and
Chris Brewin. The conference was offered by
the University of Oregon's Institute of Cognitive and Decision Sciences,
Department of Psychology, and Center for the Study of Women in Society.
Its aim was "to share knowledge and theory relvant to understanding the
way in which trauma interacts with information
processing," including "a particular focus on how traumatic information is
encoded, stored, and later retrieved from memory." The conference had a
research focus, but also addressed the significant ethical, clinical,
and societal implications of the researchers' work. The speakers represented
a broad spectrum of research approaches and points of view:
Bessel van der Kolk, Jonathan Schooler, Kathy Pezdek, John Morton,
Mary Koss, Terence Keane, Ira Hyman, Jennifer Freyd, Robyn Fivush,
Catherine Classen, Chris Brewin, J. Douglas Bremner, Bernice Andrews,
and Michael Anderson.
If you are a clinician seeking (non-suggestive) methods to help your
clients cope with and integrate traumatic memories, I strongly encourage
you to look into Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR). This
powerful brief treatment has been extensively researched, and clinical
efficacy has been shown in methodologically rigorous research, including
studies published in top journals like the Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology. For more information, including lists of publications and
upcoming trainings in your area, visit the Web sites of the
EMDR Institute and the
EMDR International Association.
False Memory Syndrome Facts is
maintained by Linda Chapman, M.S.W., whose goal is "to offer easy access
to accurate foundational information about 'false memory syndrome', in
the following arenas: scientific analysis, clinical practice, legal,
media, and organizations."
On the Veracity and
Variability of Traumatic Memory is a paper by Kevin Thomas, Holly
Laurance, W. Jake Jacobs and Lynn Nadel in Volume 2, Issue 2 of the online
journal Traumatology,
edited by Charles Figley. Thomas and his colleagues advance a model which
specifies: (1) "the conditions under which a memory for a traumatic event has
a high, medium or low probability of accurately reflecting the target event,"
and (2) "the conditions under which a second party might have a large, medium
or minimal influence on the content of the traumatic memory." Their
theoretically integrative proposal addresses possible neurobiological,
neuroanatomical, psychological and interpersonal processes involved in the
retrieval of traumatic memory fragments.
Debunking "False Memory" Myths in Sexual Abuse Cases" is an
extremely valuable article by attorney Wendy Murphy. Published
in the November 1997 Trial magazine, it teaches plaintiff's
attorneys how "an aggressive litigation strategy can head off defense
claims that memories of trauma are all in the victim's head." This Internet
copy of the article is at the Web site of
Susan K. Smith, Attorney, where
you will find a wealth of legal resources on sexual abuse and harassment,
for both people with severe abuse histories and their attorneys.
If you would like to quickly learn more about trauma and
dissociation, read psychiatrist Joan Turkus's brief and very clear
article, The
Spectrum of Dissociative Disorders: An Overview of Diagnosis and
Treatment.
The Sidran Foundation has
a wealth of excellent
Online Resources, including a
Traumatic
Memories Brochure written for non-specialists by Joyanna Silberg,
Ph.D., and a
PsychTrauma Glossary that has clear and concise definitions
of terms related to traumatic memory, dissociation, and numerous therapeutic
issues.
The Ottawa
Recovered Memory Page, maintained by Wendy Hovdestad, has a variety of
resources, including a
bibliography with 245 citations.
"This page aims to be a storehouse of
information about the current recovered memories debate. As you will
see, below, it offers a wide range of materials, including... "
Particularly if you're a journalist or reporter, you might
be interested in a study of dissociative symptoms in media eyewitnesses
to a gas chamber execution. In addition to facilitating understanding
of dissociation, this paper raises the possibility that "the act
of objective reporting in part consists of a mental state similar
to dissociation, which serves the defensive purpose of reducing
the emotional impact of traumatic events." The authors end with the
suggestion that, given the journalists' experiences, "dissociative
symptoms are not an extreme or pathological reaction seen only among
victims of disaster, war, and interpersonal violence. Rather, it seems
likely that such dissociation is a nonpathological and expectable
response to witnessing unusual or extreme physical trauma or violence."
Freinkel, A., Koopman, C., & Spiegel, D. (1994). Dissociative symptoms
in media eyewitnesses of an execution. American Journal of
Psychiatry, 151, 1335-1339.
Clearly the scholarly work cited on this page demonstrates that
people experience amnesia and delayed recall for memories of childhood
sexual abuse. But there are other traumas for which these phenomena have
been found as well though this is often forgotten in the debate. The
following is a sampling of papers reporting findings like those for
sexual abuse.
Combat trauma:
Karon, B.P., & Widener, A.J. (1997). Repressed memories and World
War II: Lest we forget! Professional Psychology: Research and
Practice, 28, 338-340.
Hendin, H., Haas, A. P., & Singer, P. (1984). The reliving experience
in Vietnam veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder. American
Journal of Psychiatry, 146, 490-495.
Archibald, H. C., & Tuddenham, R. D. (1956). Persistent
stress reaction after combat. Archives of General Psychiatry,
12, 475-481.
Kubie, L. S. (1943). Manual of emergency treatment for acute war
neuroses. War Medicine, 4, 582-599.
Myers, C. S. (1915, January). A contribution to the study of shell-shock.
Lancet, 316-320.
Thom, D. A., & Fenton, N. (1920). Amnesias in war cases. American Journal
of Insanity, 76, 437-448.
Natural disasters and accidents:
Madakasira, S., & O'Brian, K. (1987). Acute posttraumatic
stress disorder in victims of a natural disaster. Journal of Nervous
& Mental Disease, 175, 286-290.
van der Kolk, B. A., & Kadish, W. (1987). Amnesia, dissociation, and the
return of the repressed. In B. A. van der Kolk (Ed.), Psychological Trauma.
American Psychiatric Press, Inc., Washington, D.C.
Victims of torture:
Goldfeld, A. E., Mollica, R. F., Pesavento, B. H., & Faraone,
S. V. (1988). The physical and psychological sequelae of torture:
Symptomology and diagnosis. Journal of the American Medical
Association, 259, 2725-2729.
Kinzie, J. D. (1993). Posttraumatic effects and their treatment among
Southeast Asian refugees. In J.P. Wilson and B. Raphael (Eds.),
International handbook of traumatic stress syndromes. New York:
Plenum, pp.311-319.
Holocaust survivors:
24 Publications Concerning Traumatic Amnesia in Holocaust Survivors
To find the latest research in medical and (most) psychological journals,
use the PubMed
database, provided free by the National Institutes of Health. You can
go to the site, or launch your search now using the form below.
Contents
This page is maintained by
Jim Hopper, Ph.D.,
as are these related pages:
Child Abuse:
Statistics, Research, and Resources
The Validity of Recovered Memory:
Decision of a United States District Court
Mindfulness and Kindness: Inner Sources of Freedom and Happiness
Sexual Abuse of Males: Statistics,
Potential Lasting Effects, and Resources
Factors in the Cycle of Violence -
Abused Boys, Gender Socialization, and Violent Men
Trauma and Recovery - Judith
Herman's Landmark Book on Child Abuse & Other Traumas
Jim Hopper's Professional
Services - Therapy, Talks, Workshops & Consultation
© 1996-2012 Jim Hopper
www.jimhopper.com
jhopper@jimhopper99.com [remove numbers] - Put 'consult' in subject or I won't receive it.
Please note: Sadly, I cannot always respond to every message.
|