The Memory Wars Then and Now: The Contributions of Scott O. Lilienfeld

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Clinical Psychological Science Pub Date : 2023-02-24 DOI:10.1177/21677026221133034
S. Lynn, R. McNally, E. Loftus
{"title":"The Memory Wars Then and Now: The Contributions of Scott O. Lilienfeld","authors":"S. Lynn, R. McNally, E. Loftus","doi":"10.1177/21677026221133034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this review, honoring Scott O. Lilienfeld, we reflect on key conflicts, controversies, and flash points in the so-called memory wars that have captured headlines, affected legislative action, and influenced civil suits and criminal trials. We trace the memory wars, beginning in the 1990s to the present. From the outset, the memory wars featured debates regarding repressed memories, recollections of trauma, and the hazards of memory recovery therapy, and these disagreements persist today in controversies concerning dissociative amnesia, beliefs about memory, suggestive psychotherapies, and the genesis of dissociative identity disorder (DID). We acknowledge Lilienfeld’s contributions, particularly to the sociocognitive model of DID, reviewed in the second half of the article, and to a recent transtheoretical framework that contrasts sharply with the posttraumatic view of DID. The memory wars greatly enhanced scientific understanding of memory, trauma, iatrogenic psychotherapies, and dissociative disorders. We conclude with suggestions for future research to deepen understanding of issues stimulated by the memory wars.","PeriodicalId":54234,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychological Science","volume":"68 1","pages":"725 - 743"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychological Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21677026221133034","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

In this review, honoring Scott O. Lilienfeld, we reflect on key conflicts, controversies, and flash points in the so-called memory wars that have captured headlines, affected legislative action, and influenced civil suits and criminal trials. We trace the memory wars, beginning in the 1990s to the present. From the outset, the memory wars featured debates regarding repressed memories, recollections of trauma, and the hazards of memory recovery therapy, and these disagreements persist today in controversies concerning dissociative amnesia, beliefs about memory, suggestive psychotherapies, and the genesis of dissociative identity disorder (DID). We acknowledge Lilienfeld’s contributions, particularly to the sociocognitive model of DID, reviewed in the second half of the article, and to a recent transtheoretical framework that contrasts sharply with the posttraumatic view of DID. The memory wars greatly enhanced scientific understanding of memory, trauma, iatrogenic psychotherapies, and dissociative disorders. We conclude with suggestions for future research to deepen understanding of issues stimulated by the memory wars.
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
记忆战争的过去和现在:斯科特·o·利连菲尔德的贡献
在这篇纪念斯科特·o·利连菲尔德的回顾中,我们反思了所谓的记忆战争中的关键冲突、争议和闪点,这些冲突、争议和闪点占据了新闻头条,影响了立法行动,影响了民事诉讼和刑事审判。我们追溯记忆之战,从20世纪90年代到现在。从一开始,记忆战争就以关于压抑记忆、创伤回忆和记忆恢复治疗的危害的争论为特色,这些分歧今天在关于解离性健忘症、关于记忆的信仰、暗示心理治疗和解离性身份障碍(DID)起源的争论中仍然存在。我们承认Lilienfeld的贡献,特别是对DID的社会认知模型的贡献,在文章的后半部分进行了回顾,以及最近与创伤后DID观点形成鲜明对比的跨理论框架。记忆战争极大地促进了对记忆、创伤、医源性心理治疗和分离性疾病的科学理解。最后,我们对未来的研究提出了建议,以加深对记忆战争刺激问题的理解。
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
Clinical Psychological Science
Clinical Psychological Science Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
2.10%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: The Association for Psychological Science’s journal, Clinical Psychological Science, emerges from this confluence to provide readers with the best, most innovative research in clinical psychological science, giving researchers of all stripes a home for their work and a place in which to communicate with a broad audience of both clinical and other scientists.
期刊最新文献
Testing a Reward-Processing Model of Negative Urgency in Women With and Without Binge Eating Bias in the Diagnosis of Borderline Personality Disorder Among Sexual- and Gender-Minority Persons: Results From a Vignette-Based Experiment Opening the Black Box: The Underlying Working Mechanisms in Virtual-Reality Exposure Therapy for Anxiety Disorders A Bayesian Longitudinal Network Analysis of Panic-Disorder Symptoms and Respiratory Biomarkers Additive Benefits of Individual, Relational, and Community Factors on Physical- and Mental-Health Trajectories Among Black Americans
×
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:481959085
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