The classification of recovered memories: A cautionary note

Consciousness and Cognition 21 (4):1640-1643 (2012)

Abstract

Traditionally, recovered memories of childhood sexual abuse have been classified as those emerging spontaneously versus those surfacing during the course of suggestive therapy. There are indications that reinterpretation of memories might be a third route to recovered memories. Thus, recovered memories do not form a homogeneous category. Nevertheless, the conceptual distinctions between the various types of recovered memories remain difficult for researchers and clinicians. With this in mind, the current study explored whether recovered memories can be reliably classified. We found that classification is rather problematic in a subset of cases. To reduce potential bias, we urge for the development and subsequent use of a more reliable classification system and multiple expert raters in research on recovered memories

Download options

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,743

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-12-18

Downloads
17 (#642,161)

6 months
1 (#386,989)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Science in the Memory Debate.Jennifer J. Freyd - 1998 - Ethics and Behavior 8 (2):101 – 113.

Add more references

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Recovered and False Memories.Debra A. Bekerian & Susan J. Goodrich - 2000 - In G. Berrios & J. Hodges (eds.), Memory Disorders in Psychiatric Practice. Cambridge University Press. pp. 432.