User:Pageturner1988

=The American Psychological Association's Stance on Repressed Memories=

The American Psychological Association’s stance on repressed memory is split. One side believes that delayed memories of early abuse can be recovered (Alpert, Brown and Courtois 1998, p 1063), while the other side believes that repressed memories can be fallible and aren’t always accurate (Ornstein, Ceci and Loftus 1998, p. 1076). Though, both sides do agree on certain aspects of repressed memory. The first thing they all agree on is that memories are not perfect (Alpert, Brown and Courtois 1998, p 1052). Secondly, they agree that false reporting can happen due to certain suggestive practices (Ornstein, Ceci and Loftus 1998, p. 1076). Finally they agree that people go through life remembering significant memories, while other memories are cued by stimuli in the environment (Ornstein, Ceci and Loftus 1998, p. 1076). This debate between the two sides is most commonly known as the memory wars (Davis and Loftus 2006, p. 470). Most recent evidence from the APA and other scientific authorities generally doesn’t accept repressed/recovered memories (Piper, Lillevik and Kritzer 2008, p. 230). The American Psychological Association feels that there is currently no way to test a factual repressed memory from a fake one without substantial evidence (Piper, Lillevik and Kritzer 2008, p. 230).

History
The theory of repressed memories originated in the psychological literature from the work of Sigmund Freud. His analysis of case studies, such as that of Elisabeth von R. (Breuer and Freud 1995, pp. 135-182), contained the first descriptions of unconscious memory repression. In this case, Freud gives an account of a patient who he says would not admit that she was attracted to her brother-in-law. He goes on to say that after the death of her sister, she quickly thought that he could now marry her, but she could not remember thinking it because it was repressed to avoid the guilt it would cause to her conscious mind. This describes the basic concept of repressed memories as a memory too difficult or traumatic for an individual to cope with which is forgotten without conscious effort as a defense against it. It became a key part of his techniques of psychoanalysis, however it was not until the rise of recovered memory therapy in the 80s that it became well known to the public and widely used by psychoanalysts.

These psychologists began using techniques that would supposedly elicit traumatic memories patients had repressed. These seemed to reveal a large number of childhood abuse cases that had previously gone unreported. The dramatic nature of these memories (including incestuous rapes and violent satanic rituals) got them much attention from the media, which subsequently convinced more people to seek out psychologists to discover their own recovered memories. These events even convinced legislators to pass laws which allowed abuse victims to file claims against their abusers up to 3 years after they were able to remember being abused. (Satter 2003, p. 424)

The legitimacy of these memories began to be questioned when individuals started recanting their stories of abuse after realizing that their recovered memories could not have happened. Many were coming out of the experience with the same story of going to a therapist for general psychological problems (e.g. depression, bulimia) and their psychologist would suggest that it was the result of repressed memories of childhood abuse. Some of the families that had been affected by these false memories formed the False Memory Syndrome Foundation, which attempts to spread awareness of what leads to false memories and support research on the topic. (Wassil-Grimm 1995, pp.6-8)

APA's Investigation of Repressed Memories
With so much public involvement in this issue it became important for the psychological community to examine repressed memories and whether or not they exist. To do this, the American Psychological Association formed a committee of psychologists to research the topic. The six psychologists that were appointed by the American Psychological Association conducted research and experiments on repressed memories for months (Piper, Lillevik and Kritzer 2008, p. 230). Their goal was to come up with recommendations on future incidents involving adult’s unrecalled memories of childhood sex abuse (Piper, Lillevik and Kritzer 2008, p. 230). After months of working on the project, the group couldn’t agree with each other enough to write a joint report together. Instead the two groups wrote separate reports, replied to each other’s reports, and then wrote a final rejoinder to the replies (Piper, Lillevik and Kritzer 2008, p. 230).

Committee Members
The committee consisted of a working group established by the American Psychological Association. The group had six expert psychologists equally divided between clinicians and researchers (Piper, Lillevik and Kritzer 2008, p. 230). The three clinicians were Judith Alpert from New York University, Christine Courtois from the Psychiatric Institute of Washington, and Laura Brown from Seattle, Washington (Alpert, Brown and Courtois 1998, p 1052). The three researchers were Peter Ornstein from the University of North Carolina, Elizabeth Loftus from the University of Washington, and Stephen Ceci from Cornell University (Ornstein, Ceci and Loftus 1998, p. 1068).

The researcher’s side of the working group consisted of Peter Ornstein, Elizabeth Loftus, and Stephen Ceci. The researchers focused their argument around memories sometimes being fallible (Ornstein, Ceci and Loftus 1998, p. 1076). They stressed that they are even more fallible when certain suggestive techniques are used by professionals (Ornstein, Ceci and Loftus 1998, p. 1076). They felt that in most cases it was impossible to distinguish real memories and pseudo memories with no credible evidence (Ornstein, Ceci and Loftus 1998, p. 1077). The clinician’s side of the working group consisted of Judith Alpert, Laura Brown, and Christine Courtois. The clinician’s focused their argument around real psychotherapy being more accurate than lab based studies (Alpert, Brown and Courtois 1998, p 1062). They felt that patients that have really gone through traumatic events react different to psychotherapy than individuals tested in the lab with no traumatic experiences (Alpert, Brown and Courtois 1998, p 1062).

Committee Decisions
The two groups agreed on many aspects of repressed memory. They all felt that memories are not perfect and can be manipulated with certain techniques by professionals in certain environments (Alpert, Brown and Courtois 1998, p 1052). Both groups also believed that certain memories are brought about by triggers around them (Ornstein, Ceci and Loftus 1998, p. 1076). The two groups seem to split from each other in regards to psychotherapy being able to recover delayed memories accurately. Alpert, Brown, and Christine believe that repressed memories are something that can’t be tested in lab settings and can only be successfully recovered in real psychotherapy sessions with patients that have had real traumatic experiences (Alpert, Brown and Courtois 1998, p. 1062). Loftus, Ornstein, and Ceci believe that repressed memories are fallible, potentially created by suggestions from professionals, and near impossible to distinguish as real memories or pseudo memories without hard evidence (Ornstein, Ceci and Loftus 1998, p. 1077). The group of researchers thought that repressed memories could be tested in the lab, while the group of clinicians thought that this is a phenomenon that has to be used in real life context with individuals with real traumatic experiences.