Brown D
Harvard Medical School.
Am J Clin Hypn. 1995 Jan;37(3):1-24. doi: 10.1080/00029157.1995.10403135.
The pseudomemory (PM) debate has focused on individuals who do not remember sexual abuse and later recover these memories, often in therapy. This paper critically reviews experimental research on stress and memory and on suggestibility and memory in terms of its applicability to PM production in therapy. Three different kinds of suggestibility are identified--hypnotizability, postevent misinformation suggestibility, and interrogatory suggestibility. It is hypothesized that interrogatory suggestibility alone or the interaction of all three pose significant risk for PM production. It is argued that a better standard of science is needed before claims can be made about PM production in therapy, since no experimental studies have been conducted on memory performance or suggestibility effects in therapy. However, the findings derived from memory research on other populations, nevertheless, are useful to inform the standard of care in treating recovered memory patients.
伪记忆(PM)之争聚焦于那些不记得曾遭受性虐待、而后常在治疗过程中恢复这些记忆的个体。本文批判性地回顾了关于压力与记忆以及暗示性与记忆的实验研究,考量其对治疗中伪记忆产生的适用性。文中识别出三种不同类型的暗示性——可催眠性、事后错误信息暗示性及审讯暗示性。研究假设,仅审讯暗示性或这三种暗示性的相互作用会对伪记忆的产生构成重大风险。文中指出,在能够就治疗中伪记忆的产生提出主张之前,需要有更高的科学标准,因为尚未有针对治疗中的记忆表现或暗示性效应进行的实验研究。然而,从针对其他人群的记忆研究中得出的结果,对于为治疗恢复记忆患者的护理标准提供参考仍有帮助。