A scientometric and descriptive review on the debate about repressed memories and traumatic forgetting

Recovered memories in psychotherapy: a survey of practicing psychotherapists in Germany

We report on a survey of 258 psychotherapists from Germany, focusing on their experiences with memory recovery in general, suggestive therapy procedures, evaluations of recovered memories, and memory recovery in training and guidelines. Most therapists (78%) reported instances of memory recovery encompassing negative and positive childhood experiences, but usually in a minority of patients. Also, most therapists (82%) reported to have held assumptions about unremembered trauma. Patients who held these beliefs were reported by 83% of the therapists. Both therapist and patient assumptions reportedly occurred in a minority of cases. Furthermore, 35% of participants had used therapeutic techniques at least once to recover presumed trauma memories. Only 10% reported assuming trauma in most patients and recovering purported memories in a majority of the attempts. A fifth believed memory recovery was a task of psychotherapy. This belief correlated with trauma assumptions, memory recovery attempts, and recovery frequency. Psychodynamic therapists more often reported to assume trauma behind symptoms and agreed more with problematic views on trauma and memory. No differences showed regarding suggestive behaviour in therapy. Most participants expressed interest in receiving support on dealing with memory recoveries. This interest should be taken up, ideally during therapist training.

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.

Factors that contribute to an inability to remember an important aspect of a traumatic event

Dissociative amnesia is controversial. We tested other factors that could contribute to an inability to remember an important aspect of a traumatic event: how traumatic the event was, organic amnesia, dissociative state, childhood amnesia, expression suppression, sleep disturbance, repeated experiences, and ordinary forgetting. Trauma survivors who reported an inability to remember an important aspect of a traumatic event rated the event as traumatic as trauma survivors who reported no such inability to remember. Moreover, all cases of an inability to remember an important aspect of the traumatic event could be explained by at least one factor other than dissociative amnesia. These findings are contrary to dissociative amnesia. Compared to participants who reported no inability to remember an important aspect of the traumatic event, participants who did report an inability to remember were more likely to (1) have felt disconnected from their body during the traumatic event, which may have altered memory encoding, (2) have experienced sleep problems in the year after the traumatic event, which may have reduced memory consolidation, and (3) have experienced the traumatic event repeatedly, which may have led to less detailed memories. These findings have implications for the inclusion of dissociative amnesia in the DSM.