Memory Wars

Memory Wars ______________________________________ 1) Define the combatants and draw the battle lines. 2) Outline the 'standard' cognitive position and the evidence used to substantiate it. 3) Outline the 'standard' clinician's position and the evidence used to substantiate it. 4) Endeavor to find a common ground that is informed by the data. Who are major players? ______________________________________ Clinicians vs. Experimentalists APA vs. APS Alpert, Brown, & Courtois (1998) vs. Ornstein, Loftus, & Ceci (1998) Why can't they get along? And, Why should they bother? ______________________________________ Why can't we all get along? • Big disagreements in approach EX: Freud vs. Ebbinghaus • Big disagreements over what constitutes admissible evidence EX: Everyday vs. laboratory • Big disagreement on the 'null hypothesis' EX: representative quotes Clinicians: There is no evidence to suggest that psychotherapists have the degree of power and influence that would be required to produce this [fabricated memories] effect. Researchers: There is no controlled laboratory evidence for repression. Why is it imperative that we strive for some common ground? • Viability of the discipline • Pending legal statutes • Families / relationships The Experimentalist Approach ______________________________________ 1) Memory is fallible • Reconstruction is a pillar of the discipline External sources EX: suggestion / misinformation Loftus, Wagenaar: details Ceci, Hyman: whole events Caveat: Limitations Internal Sources EX: life narrative / schemas Linton: AM Neisser: FB memories 2) Therapy practices • hypnosis, suggestion, guided imagery are frequently used in therapy with abuse victims Problems: • prevalence • proper application • judgment and decision making EX: confirmation bias • recipe for planting false memories EX: Bell and the mashed potatoes More of the Experimentalist Approach ______________________________________ 3) Improbable and/or impossible events EX: Satanic rituals Space abductions Sexual abuse of children ▪ biological impossibilities ▪ regimented, ritualized abuse These memories share several attributes with recovered memories of abuse EX: delay, suggestion, authority figure 4) Retractors EX: Pendergrast How did Steve ‘treat’ Shauna? Problem: • How do we know whether the memory or the retraction represents reality? 5) But, can you really convince people that traumatic things happened to them • Suggestion by authority is VERY powerful EX: Milgram War of the Worlds Jonestown Waco Sederberg, et al. (2007) ___________________________________________ Theoretical Question: Can brain activity distinguish true/false memory? Problem with brain imaging techniques: • Vocalization • MEG / EEG Solution: drug-resistant epileptic seizures Method: • List learning paradigm (not DRM) • 2 second intra-response intervals (vocalization) Questions: • Brain activity that occurs at encoding? • Brain activity that precedes successful (unsuccessful) retrieval? • Relationship between encoding and retrieval Sederberg, et al. (2007) ___________________________________________ Results: Does retrieval represent a recapitulation of the perceptual and cognitive processes that occurred during encoding? • Significant correlation between active areas at successful encoding/retrieval Direction of activity: • Activity that preceded a correct response began in the hippocampi (500 ms) and spread forward to temporal and frontal cortex (250 ms) What does increased gamma oscillation mean? 1. attention 2. storage The Clinicians View ______________________________________ Three elements to recovered memories 1. The event had to occur 2. The forgetting has to be real Q: Why might one be less than truthful about this? 3. The spontaneous recovery must be genuine When evaluating the evidence, three questions are of paramount importance? 1. Did the events occur? 2. Were they temporarily forgotten? 3. Was the recovery spontaneous? Empirical evidence supporting the clinician's view ______________________________________ Court Cases EX: Horn (1993) Mass v. Porter (1993) Clinical cases • interview individuals with documented (court proceedings, hospital records) cases of abuse Results: • Many claimed either no memory, or significant intervals of amnesia • Interview of people in a group therapy session Results: • Majority claimed at least some to moderate forgetting of the event • 74% provided corroborating evidence (photos, admissions of the guilty), but it's not clear exactly what was considered corroborating • Could the remaining 26% provide corroborating evidence in spite of their amnesia? Corroborated Case Studies (Schooler) ________________________________________ Goal: document the three stages of false memories described above. Background: DN participated in group therapy for victims of child abuse. When the therapist mentioned that victims in childhood often continue to be victimized, DN suddenly remembered being raped as an adult. Did the events occur? Evidence: Court transcripts Testimony of Lawyer Conviction Were they temporarily forgotten? Evidence: Interview responses included detailed information about childhood incidents, but no mention of adult rape Was the recovery spontaneous? Evidence: Nothing direct; but hard to invent a scenario for fabrication. Laboratory variables and ‘recovery’ experience ___________________________________________ Salience • Event not remembered initially because the victim considered it unimportant Confidence: Low Duration • Single events more likely to be forgotten • Multiple events distorted, but lost entirely? Confidence: Low for repeated abuse Storage • Lack of rehearsal • Interference • Directed forgetting Confidence: Moderate Delay • Many cases occurred during the 20s and 30s Confidence: Very Low Retrieval Reinterpretation Encoding specificity Low High Questions to consider ______________________________________ Generalizability: Do recovered memories occur for other types of events and/or non-traumatic events? • PTSD • Eric Clapton concert ticket Specificity: Are recovered memories mediated by special memory mechanisms not observed in 'typical memory'? Clinicians' Answer: Yes. • shame • repression • trauma • emotionality Experimentalists Answer: • Evidence is murky, so more conservative to say no Note: • legacy of Flashbulb memories • We are reluctant to propose special mechanisms Concluding Questions ______________________________________ Might recovered memories be veridical? 1. Did the events occur? 2. Were they temporarily forgotten? 3. Was the recovery spontaneous? Yes! Maybe?! ???? Might recovered memories be inaccurate? • There are also retractors! Can we discern which is more likely? • Hard to say at this point. Can we distinguish between them objectively? • Level of detail • PET scan data • Corroboration is very difficult ______________________________________ What should one do when confronted with a recovered memory? I think you need to treat these memories as you would treat any other statement and use whatever criteria you normally use to evaluate the veracity of these statements. In other words, I think you need to be skeptical, but compassionate.