What Psychologists Know and Believe about Memory: A Survey of Practitioners

Same concept, different label: the effect of repressed memory and dissociative amnesia terminology on beliefs and recovered memory admissibility in court

Controversy still surrounds recovered memories, centred around replacing the term repressed memory with dissociative amnesia. This study investigated whether exposure to these terminologies impacted legal opinions. In total, 886 participants were recruited across four experiments (1a/2a, followed by 1b/2b). In experiments 1a/1b, participants were randomly allocated to one of three conditions: Repressed Memory, Dissociative Amnesia, and Control. They tested whether reading a paragraph/watching a video about one of these terms would impact their opinions on the admissibility of recovered memories in court. Experiments 2a/2b focused on dissociative amnesia's inclusion in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Participants were randomly allocated to either Dissociative Amnesia or DSM-5 Authority. Again, participants read a paragraph/watched a video corresponding to their condition, ascertaining any significant differences in opinions on recovered memory admissibility. Experiment 1a found that the Dissociative Amnesia condition was significantly more likely to support recovered memory admissibility than those in the Control condition. Experiment 1b found a significant difference between the Repressed Memory and Control condition. Experiments 2a/2b yielded no significant results. These results suggest that different terminologies affect opinions regarding recovered memory admissibility in students compared to the public (repressed memory on the public; dissociative amnesia in students).

When is memory more reliable? Scientific findings, theories, and myths

The question of whether human memory is reliable generated extensive research. Memory is open to reconstruction and false retrieval of unpresented information or unexperienced events. These can create problems in judgments and decisions that rely on memory accuracy. In the case of eyewitness testimony, these problems can result in injustice. Then again, memory is also reliable enough. Information acquisition, processing, and retrieval capacity of our memory made it possible to survive the course of evolution. Our memory also makes it possible to continue our daily lives, most of the time without major problems. In the present review, we suggest that the right question to ask may not be whether memory is reliable, but rather to ask when and under what circumstances memory is more reliable. The review's educational aim is to identify the conditions under which memory is more versus less reliable, and its theoretical aim is to discuss memory reliability. We reviewed the literature on situational, emotional, social, and individual difference variables that affect memory reliability, identified the conditions under which memory is more versus less reliable, summarized these outcomes as easy-to-reach items, and discussed them in the light of major theories. Our discussion also touched upon the differentiation of societal myths about the reliability of memory from scientific findings, since believing in memory myths can also affect the reliability of memory. Awareness of the specific circumstances under which memory is more reliable can lead to the consideration of how much memory can be trusted under those specific circumstances.

Recovered memories of trauma as a special (or not so special) form of involuntary autobiographical memories

Recovered memories of trauma are memories of traumatic events experienced generally during childhood, but of which the persons were unaware until they retrieved it. Legal decisions are sometimes based on such recovered memories, the validity of which is often questioned. Yet, people can recover genuine traumatic memories of childhood abuse. In this paper, we present and further discuss the idea that recovered traumatic memories can be interpreted in the context of the autobiographical memory framework. Specifically, we argue that recovered memories may be accessed after exposure to incidental cues that initiate unexpected spontaneous memory retrieval. Thus, we relate the recovered memory phenomenon to involuntary autobiographical memories and argue that it is an example of highly stressful, emotionally negative, and intense involuntary memories that were yet never recalled. This novel, evidence-based perspective leads us to reconsider the examination of the validity of eyewitness testimony as a continuum ranging from the least valid form (i.e., memories recovered in highly suggestive context facilitating its factitious reconstruction) to the most valid form (i.e., memories that were triggered by cues without any person's voluntary engagement), and this in relation with how internal (e.g., age and internal cue) or external (e.g., suggestion in therapy, suggestion during investigative interview, and contextual cue) factors may influence memory retrieval. Finally, we propose several recommendations for experts that may be useful in assessing the validity of a testimony based on recovered memories.

Ruling out feigned crime-related amnesia? A response to Acklin (2022)

In a recent paper, Acklin discussed a case of possible amnesia for a murder in terms of neurobiology, psychoanalysis, and personality assessment. Acklin accepted the defendant's claim of amnesia for the crime as genuine. The considerable literature that takes a skeptical view of crime-related amnesia was not cited, and the possibility of feigning or malingering was "ruled out" with a single sentence that does not withstand scrutiny. A review of the literature on feigned amnesia suggests that it may not be possible to rule out malingering even if the best available tools are used: There has been minimal investigation of most validity tests and estimates of base rates of feigned amnesia for a crime vary widely and make estimates of Negative Predictor Power highly unreliable. Although one cannot know from the information presented if Acklin's defendant legitimately experienced amnesia, feigning could not be ruled out using an interview and the test data cited by Acklin. I call for a moratorium on publication of further articles on crime specific amnesia that do not conscientiously examine other potential explanations and do not use current best practices for assessing negative response bias.

Lay Definitions of Intelligence, Knowledge, and Memory: Inter- and Independence of Constructs

The present study examined how lay participants define the following concepts used widely in psychology: being intelligent, knowing, and remembering. In the scientific community, knowledge overlaps with the contents of semantic memory, crystallized intelligence reflects the accumulation of knowledge, knowledge and event memory interact, and fluid intelligence and working memory correlate. Naturally, the lay public has implicit theories of these constructs. These theories mainly distinguish between intelligent and unintelligent behaviors and tend to include characteristics outside psychometric studies of intelligence, such as emotional intelligence. Here, we asked lay participants from the online platform Prolific to explain "what does being intelligent mean to you?" as well as "knowing" and "remembering" to understand their degree of alignment with theoretical conceptualizations in the research community. Qualitative coding of participant definitions showed that intelligence and knowledge are closely related, but asymmetrically-when defining what it means to be intelligent, participants reference knowledge, but intelligence is not considered in explaining knowing. Although participants note that intelligence is multi-faceted and related to problem-solving, there is an emphasis (in terms of frequency of mentions) on the crystallized side of intelligence (i.e., knowledge). A deeper understanding of lay participants' mental models of these constructs (i.e., their metacognitions) is essential for bridging gaps between experts and the general public.

Laypeople's perceptions of the effects of event repetition, reporting delay, and emotion on children's and adults' memory

For crimes such as child abuse and family violence, jurors' assessments of memory reports from key witnesses are vital to case outcomes in court. Since jurors are not experts on memory, the present research measured laypeople's (i.e., non-experts') beliefs about how three key factors affect witnesses' memory reports for an experienced event: how frequently an event was experienced (repeated, single), the delay between experiencing and reporting the event, and the emotional valence of the event. Across two studies, lay participants completed an online survey that measured their beliefs about each factor. In Study 1, 51 participants completed a survey about how the three factors affect children's memory. In Study 2, another 51 participants completed a survey about how the three factors affect adult's memory. Across both studies, delays were believed to worsen memory, and emotion was believed to improve memory. Beliefs about single and repeated events showed different patterns across the studies. In Study 1, participants' beliefs about children's memory for repeated experience were variable. In Study 2, participants believed that adults' memory was worse for repeated events than single events. Overall, laypeople demonstrated many accurate beliefs about memory, but showed some confusion about children's memory for repeated events.

Belief in Unconscious Repressed Memory Persists

On the basis of converging research, we concluded that the controversial topic of unconscious blockage of psychological trauma (i.e., repressed memory) remains very much alive in clinical, legal, and academic contexts. In his commentary, Brewin (this issue, p. 443) conducted a cocitation analysis and concluded that scholars do not adhere to the concept of unconscious repression. Furthermore, he argued that previous survey research did not specifically assess unconscious repression. Here, we present critical evidence that runs counter to his claims. First, we inspected his cocitation analysis and found that some scholars support notions that are closely related to unconscious repression. Furthermore, we conducted another analysis on the basis of articles' similarity. Again, we found examples of scholars specifically endorsing unconscious repressed memories. Second, as opposed to what Brewin reports, recent survey research now exists that bears directly on people's beliefs regarding unconscious repression. This work reveals that large percentages of people (e.g., students and eye-movement desensitization and reprocessing [EMDR] clinicians) endorse the concept of unconscious repressed memories. The belief in unconscious repressed memory can continue to contribute to harmful consequences in clinical, legal, and academic domains (e.g., false accusations of abuse).

Norwegian judges' knowledge of factors affecting eyewitness testimony: a 12-year follow-up

Eyewitness evidence often plays a critical role in decisions made in the criminal justice system. To evaluate eyewitness testimony accurately, judges must be aware of factors that can contaminate this type of evidence. In 2008, a survey of judges in Norway revealed a lack of awareness of several factors that affect eyewitness testimony. In the current study, a survey was administered to Norwegian judges (N=98) to evaluate their knowledge of factors that affect eyewitness testimony. Results showed that judges' overall knowledge scores were similar to those reported in 2008, but substantial increases and decreases in knowledge were observed for specific factors. Additional analyses indicated that increased uncertainty regarding some eyewitness factors led to a decline in accuracy when compared to responses observed in 2008. The current study provides an updated assessment of judges' knowledge of eyewitness factors and highlights the need for more comprehensive training for judges regarding these factors.

The Return of the Repressed: The Persistent and Problematic Claims of Long-Forgotten Trauma

Can purely psychological trauma lead to a complete blockage of autobiographical memories? This long-standing question about the existence of repressed memories has been at the heart of one of the most heated debates in modern psychology. These so-called memory wars originated in the 1990s, and many scholars have assumed that they are over. We demonstrate that this assumption is incorrect and that the controversial issue of repressed memories is alive and well and may even be on the rise. We review converging research and data from legal cases indicating that the topic of repressed memories remains active in clinical, legal, and academic settings. We show that the belief in repressed memories occurs on a nontrivial scale (58%) and appears to have increased among clinical psychologists since the 1990s. We also demonstrate that the scientifically controversial concept of dissociative amnesia, which we argue is a substitute term for memory repression, has gained in popularity. Finally, we review work on the adverse side effects of certain psychotherapeutic techniques, some of which may be linked to the recovery of repressed memories. The memory wars have not vanished. They have continued to endure and contribute to potentially damaging consequences in clinical, legal, and academic contexts.

When psychological science fails to be heard: the lack of evidence-based arguments in a ministerial report on child sexual abuse

One of the most debated issues in relation to child sexual abuse (CSA) is whether there should be a limitation period for prosecutions. In 2017 a French ministerial report was released proposing extension of the limitation period in part because of the sometimes long delay between the alleged events and the disclosure of the abuse. For this, the report relied on dissociative amnesia. It also advocated for the development of child victim interview protocols by victim associations. We show that dissociative amnesia is not consensual within the scientific community. Instead, we recommend scientifically reliable cognitive principles to explain the lack of memory. Moreover, interviewing techniques for children have already been designed by memory researchers to enhance recall and report of CSA, from which any uncontrolled deviation might put the child's testimony at risk. We conclude by advocating for the use of evidence-based psychology, and for co-operation between practitioners, judges and researchers.

Testing Claims of Crime-Related Amnesia

Many violent offenders report amnesia for their crime. Although this type of memory loss is possible, there are reasons to assume that many claims of crime-related amnesia are feigned. This article describes ways to evaluate the genuineness of crime-related amnesia. A recent case is described in which several of these strategies yielded evidence for feigned crime-related amnesia.

The Griffiths Question Map: A Forensic Tool For Expert Witnesses' Assessments of Witnesses and Victims' Statements

Expert witnesses are sometimes asked to assess the reliability of young witnesses and victims' statements because of their high susceptibility to memory biases. This technical note aims to highlight the relevance of the Griffiths Question Map (GQM) as a professional forensic tool to improve expert witnesses' assessments of young witnesses and victims' testimonies. To do so, this innovative question type assessment grid was used to proceed to an in-depth analysis of the interview of an alleged 13-year-old victim of a sexual assault and two rapes. Overall, the GQM stressed how the interview was mainly conducted in an inappropriate manner. The results are examined with regard to scientific knowledge on young witnesses and victims' memory. Finally, it is argued that expert witnesses in inquisitorial systems might use the GQM while encountering difficulties to fulfill the legal standards for expert evidence in adversarial systems because of the lack of studies regarding its reliability.

Latent variables underlying the memory beliefs of Chartered Clinical Psychologists, Hypnotherapists and undergraduate students

In courts in the United Kingdom, understanding of memory phenomena is often assumed to be a matter of common sense. To test this assumption 337 UK respondents, consisting of 125 Chartered Clinical Psychologists, 88 individuals who advertised their services as Hypnotherapists (HTs) in a classified directory, the Yellow Pages^TM, and 124 first year undergraduate psychology students, completed a questionnaire that assessed their knowledge of 10 memory phenomena about which there is a broad scientific consensus. HTs' responses were the most inconsistent with the scientific consensus, scoring lowest on six of these ten items. Principal Components Analysis indicated two latent variables - reflecting beliefs about memory quality and malleability - underlying respondents' responses. In addition, respondents were asked to rate their own knowledge of the academic memory literature in general. There was no significant relationship between participants' self reported knowledge and their actual knowledge (as measured by their responses to the 10-item questionnaire). There was evidence of beliefs among the HTs that could give rise to some concern (e.g., that early memories from the first year of life are accurately stored and are retrievable).

What Do People Believe About Memory? Implications for the Science and Pseudoscience of Clinical Practice

We examine the evidence concerning what people believe about memory. We focus on beliefs regarding the permanence of memory and whether memory can be repressed and accurately recovered. We consider beliefs about memory among the undergraduate and general population, mental health professionals, judges, jurors, and law enforcement officers to provide a broad canvass that extends to the forensic arena, as well as to psychiatry, psychology, and allied disciplines. We discuss the implications of these beliefs for the education of the general public and mental health professionals regarding the science and pseudoscience of memory and the use of suggestive procedures in psychotherapy.

Child sexual abuse research knowledge among child abuse professionals and laypersons

The purposes of this study were to: (1) Assess child abuse professionals' and nonprofessionals' knowledge of scientific research findings that are relevant to forensic child sexual abuse (CSA) evaluations and (2) describe associations between child abuse professionals' levels of research knowledge and their education and experience. An 18-item multiple-choice test was administered to 188 child abuse professionals and 457 nonprofessionals (undergraduate college students) in Brazil and the United States. The nonprofessionals' average percent correct, M=44%, was not significantly different than what would be expected for random guessing (45%). The professionals' average percent correct, M=55%, was higher than that of nonprofessionals and random guessing (both ps<.001). The average percent correct score for the US-sample psychologists, M=76%, was higher than the average score of the other professionals, M=51%, p<.001. Professionals' educational level, as measured by the highest academic degree obtained, was positively associated with percent correct scores, Spearman's ρ=.46, p<.001. Controlling for educational attainment, professional experience, as measured by the total number of CSA evaluations performed, was weakly associated with percent correct scores, partial r=.15, p=.04. Percent correct scores were low for both nonprofessionals and professionals. Most of the participants in this study were uninformed or misinformed about scientific research findings that are important for conducting optimal forensic CSA evaluations and for making accurate judgments about the validity of sexual abuse allegations.

Are the "memory wars" over? A scientist-practitioner gap in beliefs about repressed memory

The "memory wars" of the 1990s refers to the controversy between some clinicians and memory scientists about the reliability of repressed memories. To investigate whether such disagreement persists, we compared various groups' beliefs about memory and compared their current beliefs with beliefs expressed in past studies. In Study 1, we found high rates of belief in repressed memory among undergraduates. We also found that greater critical-thinking ability was associated with more skepticism about repressed memories. In Study 2, we found less belief in repressed memory among mainstream clinicians today compared with the 1990s. Groups that contained research-oriented psychologists and memory experts expressed more skepticism about the validity of repressed memories relative to other groups. Thus, a substantial gap between the memory beliefs of clinical-psychology researchers and those of practitioners persists today. These results hold implications for the potential resolution of the science-practice gap and for the dissemination of memory research in the training of mental-health professionals.

Inferential false memories of events: negative consequences protect from distortions when the events are free from further elaboration

The present experiment was conducted to investigate whether negative emotionally charged and arousing content of to-be-remembered scripted material would affect propensity towards memory distortions. We further investigated whether elaboration of the studied material through free recall would affect the magnitude of memory errors. In this study participants saw eight scripts. Each of the scripts included an effect of an action, the cause of which was not presented. Effects were either negatively emotional or neutral. Participants were assigned to either a yes/no recognition test group (recognition), or to a recall and yes/no recognition test group (elaboration + recognition). Results showed that participants in the recognition group produced fewer memory errors in the emotional condition. Conversely, elaboration + recognition participants had lower accuracy and produced more emotional memory errors than the other group, suggesting a mediating role of semantic elaboration on the generation of false memories. The role of emotions and semantic elaboration on the generation of false memories is discussed.