Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Section of Forensic Psychology, Maastricht University.
Department of Psychology, City, University of London.
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2021 Mar;16(2):454-460. doi: 10.1177/1745691621990628.
On the basis of converging research, we concluded that the controversial topic of unconscious blockage of psychological trauma (i.e., repressed memory) remains very much alive in clinical, legal, and academic contexts. In his commentary, Brewin (this issue, p. 443) conducted a cocitation analysis and concluded that scholars do not adhere to the concept of unconscious repression. Furthermore, he argued that previous survey research did not specifically assess repression. Here, we present critical evidence that runs counter to his claims. First, we inspected his cocitation analysis and found that some scholars support notions that are closely related to unconscious repression. Furthermore, we conducted another analysis on the basis of articles' similarity. Again, we found examples of scholars specifically endorsing unconscious repressed memories. Second, as opposed to what Brewin reports, recent survey research now exists that bears directly on people's beliefs regarding unconscious repression. This work reveals that large percentages of people (e.g., students and eye-movement desensitization and reprocessing [EMDR] clinicians) endorse the concept of unconscious repressed memories. The belief in unconscious repressed memory can continue to contribute to harmful consequences in clinical, legal, and academic domains (e.g., false accusations of abuse).
基于汇聚研究,我们得出结论,心理创伤的无意识阻断(即压抑记忆)这一颇具争议的话题在临床、法律和学术领域仍然非常活跃。在他的评论中,Brewin(本期,第 443 页)进行了共引分析,并得出结论认为学者们并不坚持无意识压抑的概念。此外,他认为之前的调查研究并没有专门评估压抑。在这里,我们提供了与他的说法相悖的关键证据。首先,我们检查了他的共引分析,发现一些学者支持与无意识压抑密切相关的概念。此外,我们还根据文章的相似性进行了另一个分析。同样,我们发现了一些学者明确支持无意识压抑记忆的例子。其次,与 Brewin 所报告的相反,现在已经有了直接针对人们对无意识压抑看法的最新调查研究。这项工作表明,很大比例的人(例如学生和眼动脱敏再加工(EMDR)临床医生)都认可无意识压抑记忆的概念。对无意识压抑记忆的信念可能会继续在临床、法律和学术领域造成有害后果(例如,对虐待的虚假指控)。