‘Recovered memories are almost always false memories’.
Critically discuss this assertion through reference to research and practice in
counselling and forensic psychology.
Human memory does not work like a video recorder, memories are based on
our emotional state, social expectations, similar fictitious or past events,
suggestions, and is susceptible to distortions. They may even change to the
opposite of reality due to reconstructive nature of memory. Therapists who
work with trauma survivors believe that recovered memories are true
because they are accompanied by such extreme emotions. Other therapists
are implanting memories or causing false memories in patients by
suggesting that they are victims of abuse when no abuse occurred. While
some psychologists claim that repressed memories can be restored with
psychotherapy, experts in the psychology of memory often argue that
psychotherapy, rather than helping to restore true repressed memory, is
more likely to contribute to the creation of false memories. There is much
debate surrounding the question whether repressed memories can be
recovered, as well as whether they are true or false. In the academic battle
that has since been called ‘Memory wars,’ (The Open University, 2021a) the
ongoing debate is far from over about the validity of recovered memories.
This essay is to critically discuss some key points and supporting evidence
around the debate, highlighting its controversies in the context of forensic
psychology and counselling.
Due to the reconstructive nature of memory (Bartlett, 1932, cited in The
Open University, 2021b), false information that comes from imagination can
lead people to recall events that never happened. Thought restructuring
occurs in psychotherapies, such as EMDR (Shapiro, 1989, cited in Richards
and Reid, 2017), when the patient is asked to reprocess traumatic memories
Critically discuss this assertion through reference to research and practice in
counselling and forensic psychology.
Human memory does not work like a video recorder, memories are based on
our emotional state, social expectations, similar fictitious or past events,
suggestions, and is susceptible to distortions. They may even change to the
opposite of reality due to reconstructive nature of memory. Therapists who
work with trauma survivors believe that recovered memories are true
because they are accompanied by such extreme emotions. Other therapists
are implanting memories or causing false memories in patients by
suggesting that they are victims of abuse when no abuse occurred. While
some psychologists claim that repressed memories can be restored with
psychotherapy, experts in the psychology of memory often argue that
psychotherapy, rather than helping to restore true repressed memory, is
more likely to contribute to the creation of false memories. There is much
debate surrounding the question whether repressed memories can be
recovered, as well as whether they are true or false. In the academic battle
that has since been called ‘Memory wars,’ (The Open University, 2021a) the
ongoing debate is far from over about the validity of recovered memories.
This essay is to critically discuss some key points and supporting evidence
around the debate, highlighting its controversies in the context of forensic
psychology and counselling.
Due to the reconstructive nature of memory (Bartlett, 1932, cited in The
Open University, 2021b), false information that comes from imagination can
lead people to recall events that never happened. Thought restructuring
occurs in psychotherapies, such as EMDR (Shapiro, 1989, cited in Richards
and Reid, 2017), when the patient is asked to reprocess traumatic memories
