Recovered memory practices in Ireland: public & professional perspectives.

IF 2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Memory Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-13 DOI:10.1080/09658211.2025.2462645
Gillian Murphy, Owen Coyle, Michelle Kerin, Christian Ryan, Maria Dempsey
{"title":"Recovered memory practices in Ireland: public & professional perspectives.","authors":"Gillian Murphy, Owen Coyle, Michelle Kerin, Christian Ryan, Maria Dempsey","doi":"10.1080/09658211.2025.2462645","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We surveyed members of the public and professionals to assess opinions and experiences related to recovered memories in Ireland (<i>N</i> = 675). We found that memory recovery amongst therapy-goers in Ireland is relatively common (8%). Likewise, many practitioners (29%) reported some experience with a client recovering a memory and most had actually recovered a memory themselves. However, both groups struggled with definitions of recovered memories: initially reporting inflated figures (19% & 84%, respectively) that incorporated normal, non-repression-related memory mechanisms. Working therapists and current trainees reported a profound lack of training in this area. We also replicated a previously demonstrated scientist-practitioner divide, where researchers were more likely than practitioners to endorse the fallibility of memory. Though the study related to a sensitive topic, both professionals and members of the public reported enjoying the survey and did not find the questions distressing or ethically problematic - encouraging for future research in this field.</p>","PeriodicalId":18569,"journal":{"name":"Memory","volume":" ","pages":"404-415"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2025.2462645","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We surveyed members of the public and professionals to assess opinions and experiences related to recovered memories in Ireland (N = 675). We found that memory recovery amongst therapy-goers in Ireland is relatively common (8%). Likewise, many practitioners (29%) reported some experience with a client recovering a memory and most had actually recovered a memory themselves. However, both groups struggled with definitions of recovered memories: initially reporting inflated figures (19% & 84%, respectively) that incorporated normal, non-repression-related memory mechanisms. Working therapists and current trainees reported a profound lack of training in this area. We also replicated a previously demonstrated scientist-practitioner divide, where researchers were more likely than practitioners to endorse the fallibility of memory. Though the study related to a sensitive topic, both professionals and members of the public reported enjoying the survey and did not find the questions distressing or ethically problematic - encouraging for future research in this field.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
爱尔兰的恢复记忆实践:公众和专业的观点。
我们调查了爱尔兰的公众和专业人士,以评估他们对恢复记忆的看法和经历(N = 675)。我们发现,在爱尔兰接受治疗的人中,记忆恢复相对普遍(8%)。同样,许多从业者(29%)报告了一些客户恢复记忆的经验,大多数人实际上自己也恢复了记忆。然而,两组人都在为恢复记忆的定义而挣扎:最初报告的是夸大的数字(分别为19%和84%),其中包含了正常的、与压抑无关的记忆机制。在职治疗师和目前的受训人员报告说,在这方面的培训严重缺乏。我们还重复了先前证明的科学家-实践者的分歧,即研究人员比实践者更有可能支持记忆的不可靠性。虽然这项研究涉及到一个敏感的话题,但专业人士和公众都表示很喜欢这项调查,并没有发现这些问题令人痛苦或有道德问题——这对该领域未来的研究是鼓舞人心的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Memory
Memory PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
79
期刊介绍: Memory publishes high quality papers in all areas of memory research. This includes experimental studies of memory (including laboratory-based research, everyday memory studies, and applied memory research), developmental, educational, neuropsychological, clinical and social research on memory. By representing all significant areas of memory research, the journal cuts across the traditional distinctions of psychological research. Memory therefore provides a unique venue for memory researchers to communicate their findings and ideas both to peers within their own research tradition in the study of memory, and also to the wider range of research communities with direct interest in human memory.
期刊最新文献
False categorical memories: effects of list composition, divided attention & pre-retrieval warnings. Ingroup bias in conversational memory: the role of nationalism in the saying-is-believing effect. How prior knowledge and statement truth affect retrieval experiences over time. Investigating the colour bizarreness effect in long-term memory. Involuntary remembering in everyday life: the possible roles of concurrent activities and thoughts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1