Leading vs. leading & The risk of false memories

Memory falsification through psychotherapy

The idea that traumatic memories can be suppressed and later, for example in the context of psychotherapy, return to consciousness is widespread both in the general population and among therapists. While the existence of repressed trauma is beyond question, the frequency of its occurrence is the subject of current debate. It is often not possible to decide whether a memory was actually suppressed and later recovered, or whether it arose at a later point in time, i.e. whether it is a false memory.

For a memory to be properly classified as “recovered”, it must be established firstly that the event in question actually took place, secondly that it was forgotten and it was not possible for the person to remember it, and thirdly that it was remembered again later.

Loftus and Davis were able to demonstrate major methodological flaws in studies that supported the thesis of recovered memories. For example, it was not tested whether a remembered experience actually happened or not. Another study interpreted the fact that women who had experienced abuse that had objectively taken place did not mention this abuse in an interview seventeen years later as a suppression of memory. However, there may be other reasons for not reporting abuse in an interview, such as shame or a lack of rapport with the investigator; There was little evidence that traumatic experiences are usually repressed and forgotten and can be recalled later. Although there are numerous reports of people recalling abuse, some of it on a massive scale, this raises the question of the extent to which these events took place or are false memories and, if this is the case, how these false memories can arise.

Examples of memory distorting effects in psychotherapy:

• Priming: Among the effects of priming are selective attention to relevant information, biased interpretation of relevant information, and memory processes by which consistent but false memories are created for priming and existing memories are distorted consistent with priming.
• Bias: Many patients who enter therapy are looking for an explanation of their problems. This makes them susceptible to plausible-sounding theories for the cause of their suffering; If it is suggested to a patient that they may have been abused, together with a pre-existing idea about the possibility of sexual abuse, they may form a false memory of abuse. This possibility of an explanation can lead patients to stick to this thesis and defend it against doubts; On the therapist side, the person who believes abuse and repressed memories of abuse are common will be more likely to ask questions along these lines and be more receptive to patient symptoms that may indicate abuse.
• Plausibility: Information that makes previously implausible information subjectively more plausible can encourage the creation of false memories. Suggestive influences inside and outside of therapy can reinforce the idea of abuse, regardless of whether abuse can actually be recalled or not. For example, if a qualified source indicates that a person’s symptoms could be caused by abuse, there is an increased likelihood that the person will also believe that abuse is the cause.
• Acceptance and confirmation: Once a patient has come to the conclusion that they have been abused, there is a risk that they will work with the therapist to focus on accepting, confirming and reinforcing their new identity as a victim of abuse. Continuing to deal with the topic, reading case reports or attending a self-help group can in turn promote the emergence and persistence of false memories;