Essay Sample bout Repressed Memories
Memory repression has been defined as the idea that memories of painful or traumatic events that have occurred in an individual’s life can be “stored” away from the conscious mind. These memories can then supposedly be recalled or recovered years after the traumatic event took place. Today, memory repression is often referred to as “dissociative amnesia,” which will be important later on. According to the National Library of Medicine, dissociative amnesia, similar to memory repression, involves having gaps in one’s memory due to the occurrence of a stressful or traumatic event. However, unlike memory repression, dissociative amnesia is mentioned in both the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, more specifically the DSM-IV-TR and more recent DSM-V. The idea of memory repression and dissociative amnesia remains a controversial topic in psychology, yet it is commonly believed by both professionals and the general public. Why is this so, and why was the terminology for this phenomenon changed?
Why is this Myth Commonly Believed?
As is the case with many myths in psychology, a good majority of people who believe in the concept of memory repression is the general public. According to an article titled “The Return of the Repressed: The Persistent and Problematic Claims of Long-Forgotten Trauma,” a survey conducted in 2006 revealed that approximately 45% of the 900 participants believed that traumatic memories can be repressed from the conscious mind (Otgaar et al., 2019). In addition, another survey conducted in 2014 found that 81% of 316 undergraduate respondents believed in that painful or traumatic memories can be repressed (Otgaar et al., 2019). This may be significant in understanding the beliefs that a majority of laypersons have on the subject of memory repression, but what about professionals in psychology? The idea of memory repression seems to be “common knowledge” and widely regarded as a defense mechanism against the memories of traumatic events. One may have the notion that professionals would be aware of myths in psychology, such as memory repression or dissociative amnesia. Surprisingly, however, the opposite seems to be true.
According to the same article, a survey conducted in 1997 found that 58% of PhD-level clinicians, 71% of PsyD-level clinicians, and 60% of MSW-level clinicians believed that memory repression was legitimate (Otgaar et al., 2019). Even more surprisingly, a survey conducted the following year revealed that 96% of licensed psychotherapists believed in the existence of memory repression (Otgaar et al., 2019). It is important to note that during the 1990s, the so-called “memory wars” took place, in which a continuous debate over the existence of memory repression occurred, so this may explain these high percentages. Despite the evidence against the existence of repressed memories, more recent surveys reveal an interesting problem. According to the article, a 2012 survey found that 63% of licensed psychologists believed in memory repression and recovery; in the following year, 89% of the surveyed clinical psychologists believed that memories of childhood trauma can be repressed for years (Otgaar et al., 2019). Even more recently, a survey conducted in 2017 showed that 69.6% of clinical psychologists believed that the mind is capable of repressing memories. How can this be so, if memory repression is only a myth?
What is the Truth About Memory Repression?
Although memory repression is a commonly accepted myth among both the general public and licensed professionals in psychology, it has been found to be a problematic concept by psychologists. As stated in the article “The Return of the Repressed: The Persistent and Problematic Claims of Long-Forgotten Trauma,” the notion that memories can be repressed has been found to be problematic due to the fact that false memories can be implanted or developed as a result of receiving therapeutic intervention. This issue was found to stem from therapists informing their patients that they may have repressed memories from their childhood (Otgaar et al., 2019). This phenomenon is called the “false-memory-implantation paradigm,” in which false memories of either positive or negative events can be implanted through various means. To add on, quite obviously, memory repression is difficult to test, or falsify, especially if pain or trauma is the cause of the supposed repressed memory. The action of memory storage, or repression, is also difficult to falsify and can only be determined by memorial report.
Because of the number of issues found in the belief about memory repression, the term “dissociative amnesia” started to be used as a substitute; the article’s authors argue that the change was made to make the concept more “palatable.” As stated in a previous section, dissociative amnesia is mentioned in the DSM-V, where it is defined as the “inability to recall autobiographical information” that is usually stressful or traumatic in nature (Otgaar et al., 2019). Even though memory repression is still being perpetuated as a real phenomenon though the guise of “dissociative amnesia,” it is still a controversial subject. In recent years, more reasonable explanations for the supposed repression of memories have been developed. False or feigned amnesia has been documented, according to the article, as well as everyday forgetfulness or even “childhood amnesia” rather than dissociative amnesia. Implanted or newly developed memories as a result of therapy is also plausible. Another explanation for supposed memory repression is the fact that many victims of abuse or other traumatic events tend to keep the experience to themselves rather than disclose it. Finally, the concept that both laypersons and professionals in psychology may be misinterpreting as memory repression is actually conscious memory suppression. Rather than an unconscious phenomenon, it is much more likely that people who experienced painful or traumatic events actively suppress memories and feelings that result from them.
Conclusion
Despite the fact that memory repression is a controversial subject among psychologists, it continues to be a widely believed concept. As discussed previously, quite a high percentage of the general public, undergraduates, and professionals in the field of psychology still believe in the concept of memory repression. For laypersons, this is likely the result of supposed “common knowledge.” On the other hand, in the case of professionals, the high endorsement for memory repression is likely the result of the “memory wars” that took place in the 1990s. The term “dissociative amnesia” began to be used as a substitute for memory repression due to the controversy surrounding the topic. However, many critics remain, and rightfully so. Over the years, research has begun developing much more plausible explanations for supposed repression of memories, ranging from normal forgetfulness to implanted or false memories. Many people may also be incorrectly interpreting the idea that traumatic memories can be “blocked” from the conscious mind as memory repression, when in reality it could be conscious memory suppression. Perhaps the DSM-V itself needs to be revised regarded the subject of “dissociative amnesia,” and both the general public and even professionals can better understand how memories are truly “blocked” from the conscious mind.
