Running head: ARE BLOCKED AND RECOVERED MEMORIES VALID PHENOMENA?

Are Blocked and Recovered Memories Valid Phenomena? name Psy/515 April 9, 2012 Daniel Williams, Jr. PsyD

ARE BLOCKED AND RECOVERED MEMORIES VALID PHENOMENA?

Are Blocked and Recovered Memories Valid Phenomena? Some people in life have experienced an event so traumatic that the person will seek to avoid memories of the event as a way to cope with what has happened. People actively suppressing memories or avoiding the memories of the traumatic event is considered a normal coping process, however, there is controversy over a person being able to block the memory and recover the memory at a later date. Can a person really block memories of traumatic events and then recover the memories, or is this phenomena a case for false memory syndrome? This paper is going to process two differing views on the subject of block and recovered memories, one for and one against the use. The paper will cover the facts as well as opinions presented by both sides and the strengths, weaknesses, and how credible both sides were in the argument. Finally, the paper will select which side the author agrees with more as well as which side contemporary research supports. Facts and Opinions On the con side of the argument is John Kihlstrom who believes that the claims of blocked and recovered memories are nothing more than clinical folklore with no scientific study or evidence to provide proof. Kihlstrom continues that the emotional arousal resulting from a traumatic experience leads to the release of stress hormones that improve memory. Kihlstrom believes based on this a traumatic event should actually result in a more vivid memory as opposed to a repressed one. The pro side of the argument includes David Gleaves, Steven Smith, Lisa Butler, and David Spiegel assert that there are circumstances in which severe distress can lead a person to block a memory only to later recover the memory. Gleaves and his colleagues contend that while it has been proven that false memories can be implanted those cases dealt

ARE BLOCKED AND RECOVERED MEMORIES VALID PHENOMENA?

with ordinary and non-stressful events and therefore it would be unlikely that people would develop false memories about traumatic situations. Kihlstrom contends that persuasive therapists in combination with popular media may result in beliefs about blocked memories that are later recovered. Kihlstrom continues that why much of the evidence on false memories appears in the popular press is not a reason to discount the accounts since journalists tend to be held to higher corroborative accountability than psychotherapists who claim to assist in recovering blocked memories. Gleaves and his colleagues believe that the fact that attempts to substantiate claims of false memories coming from anecdotal reports and not from empirical data is proof of its invalidity. Gleaves and his colleagues continue that most reports dealing with false memories come from those who claim to have been falsely accused of perpetrating sexual abuse or from retractors. Strengths and Weaknesses There are both strengths and weaknesses on both sides of the argument. For instances, according to Radel and Simonsen (2008), researchers uniformly suggest that there is no way to discern a real memory from a false memory without additional corroborating evidence. Often times the recalled memories happen long after the alleged traumatic event such as sexual abuse or incest and as such, the memory cannot be proven true or false. Both of these facts can prove to be a weakness for those claiming that blocked and repressed memories both happen and are valid, since there is no way to prove that the memories are valid or even real. Strengths for the support of blocked and recovered memories can be seen in the DSM. According to Halgin (2010), the DSM provides symptoms of dissociative amnesia, which is a reversible memory impairment in which memories of personal experience cannot be retrieved in verbal form, events are usually traumatic or stressful in nature, and the loss of recall is too extensive to be explained

ARE BLOCKED AND RECOVERED MEMORIES VALID PHENOMENA?

by normal forgetfulness (p. 99). Additionally, repressed memories have been studied and described by psychologists such as Pierre Janet and Sigmund Freud in the beginning of the 19th century. A weakness going against those on the con side of the argument is the fact that most of the evidence supporting false memories comes from anecdotal reports and not from empirical data. According to Halgin (2010), reports come from popular media, newspapers, and lawsuits of people that claim to have been falsely accused of sexual abuse or by the people that initially remembered the memory only to retract the claim and state it was implanted. There is no scientific studies proving that these people have had false memories, or the memories have been implanted. Strengths for the con side can be found in a few places, such as the fact that the human memory in general is inaccurate frequently, as noted by Elizabeth Loftus (2002), in regards to the numerous people freed on DNA evidence after eyewitness accounts convicted the same people. Additionally, false memories can be implanted. Loftus (2002), contends that people incorporate what is witnessed or experienced with what is later told to the person in order to create a seamless memory of the event. People that were informed of things after the event later were generally more likely to incorporated the events into the individuals recollection of what happened regardless of if it actually happened or not. Which Author is Better Both sides of the argument come off as very credible but lacking in overall research to support the argument at hand. The con side of the argument had a lack of empirical research to support the evidence that repressed memories are nothing more than false memories that are recalled or implanted. The pro side of the argument also suffers from a lack of research on the subject of repressed memories. It is the belief of the author at this point in time both sides are

ARE BLOCKED AND RECOVERED MEMORIES VALID PHENOMENA?

lacking in supportive evidence and research. Therefore, neither side comes out as a better choice for or against repressed memories and the memories validity. Support by Contemporary Research Both sides of the argument are able to produce information to cite as research for the given side. For the con side there is the use of reported false memories being recanted as well as the research on the implantation of memories. This is strong evidence that repressed memories may be false memories that could be implanted at some point in time, most likely by a psychologist trying to help the person remember traumatic events. On the pro side there is research dating back to the beginning of the 19th century by Janet, Freud, and others that suggests the evidence of repressed memories. Additionally, there are symptoms listed in the DSM dealing with dissociative amnesia that seem to coincide with the symptoms associated with repressed memories. Research on the subject is mixed in its reviews of repressed memories, but mostly sides against the validity noting all the cases and reports of popular media and people claiming repressed memories. Conclusion In conclusion, the controversy over repressed memories and the memories validity is an interesting one that needs more scientific research. Neither side involved in able to prove or disprove repressed memories that are later recalled. Neither side is able to provide the research on false memories or the repressed memories that would validate false implanted memories or prove the existence of repressed memories. At this time both sides need more research in order to strengthen the views that the side holds on repressed memories and the memories validity.

ARE BLOCKED AND RECOVERED MEMORIES VALID PHENOMENA?

ARE BLOCKED AND RECOVERED MEMORIES VALID PHENOMENA?

References Halgin, R. (2009). Taking sides: Clashing views in abnormal psychology (5th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill. Loftus, E. (2002, June). Memory Faults and Fixes. Issues in Science and Technology, 18(),. Radel, I., & Simonsen, J. (2008). Repressed Memory: Real or Fantasy?. FDCC Quarterly, 58(4), 459-479.