NCJ Number
205467
Date Published
2002
Length
16 pages
Annotation
This article examines the debate surrounding recovered memories of traumatic events, including the sociohistorical context in which the debate arose and the research literature on the forgetting and recovery of memories for childhood sexual abuse.
Abstract
The idea that people can forget certain events, especially traumatic events, and then later recover the memory, has been around for centuries. By the end of the 1900’s, the focus on forgotten and later recovered memories was primarily on memories of childhood sexual abuse. The debate polarized around two competing arguments; on the one hand, it was asserted that individuals could forget traumatic events and later recover the memories accurately and intact. On the other hand, others contended that a developing hysteria was convincing otherwise normal adults that the root of their problem was to be found in forgotten memories of childhood sexual abuse. Following an introduction in Section 1 and a sociohistorical analysis of the context in which the debate arose in Section 2, Section 3 offers a review of the empirical research on recovered memories. A sampling of different types of studies are presented, including studies utilizing personal interviews of patient populations, survey studies, prospective studies, and case studies. Despite methodological difficulties inherent in studying recovered memory experiences, there is a general agreement among the various findings that individuals can have actual recovered memories that correspond to abuse suffered as a child. Section 4 discusses theories and mechanisms involved in recovered memories. Four theoretical perspectives are examined for their contribution to an understanding of recovered memories: psychodynamic theories of repression, dissociation during traumas, brain theories on processing, and betrayal trauma theory. Next, several well-established and general memory/forgetting mechanisms are reviewed, including simple forgetting, directed/intentional forgetting, interference theories of memory, change in understanding/reinterpretation, and encoding specificity/state dependency. Additionally, three memory mechanisms that are more speculative are considered worthy of review: the “forgot it all along” effect, precipitous forgetting of nocturnal experiences, and changes in metaconsciousness. Section 5 considers the accuracy of recovered memories; research is reviewed that suggests at least some recovered memories may be false. Section 6 offers an analysis in which recovered memories are regarded as a nuanced phenomenon with degrees of accuracy. Future research may focus on the plethora of relevant mechanisms that lead individuals to believe they have experienced a memory recovery involving childhood trauma. Suggested readings