Bob McCue wrote an interesting review. I haven't read all of it, but I thought the part on recovered memories was interesting. He cited a trained friend of his:
“There is a difference between repressed memories that spontaneously resurface, and
those which are "recovered.
“Repressed memory is a somewhat controversial topic. However, most psychologists,
especially those in applied fields, will agree that repressed memory is real (that's the first
debate in this area) and that repressing memory is a coping strategy for dealing with
trauma. Repression can occur to various degrees, but tends to only occur in situations
where the memory would be too damaging to the individual to deal with at the present
time. So, it's filed away and forgotten until such a time as it can be more safely dealt
with. However, repressed memories of trauma can still be distressing enough to "leak
out" as other psychological symptoms. Children who are sexually abused are VERY
likely to repress memories of the abuse (more probably repress memories to some
extent than don't). These memories often resurface spontaneously in adulthood when
triggered (by entering romantic relationships, having children, re-experiencing stimuli
related to the trauma, etc.) When these memories resurface spontaneously THEY
CANNOT BE CONSIDERED FALSELY IMPLANTED MEMORIES. These memories are
very likely to be accurate, even when minor details are called into question. This type of
remembering is not considered very controversial by most psychologists.
“This is different from "recovered memories." The common scenario for a recovered
memory looks like this. A woman with vague anxiety and depressive symptoms goes to
therapy. She initially denies ever having been sexually molested, but the therapist can
find no "cause" for her symptoms. So, somthat the client has been molested. The therapist may even recommend hypnosis as a
way to "recover" the memory, or some other technique. The more a therapist suggests
the abuse, the more pressure the client may feel to remember it, whether or not it
occurred. The client continuously recounts the abuse, adding new details every time she
shares the memory, until the memory is fully "recovered."e gung-ho therapists continuously suggest“
In general, any memories that are spontaneously recovered are statistically as likely to
be accurate to the same degree as any other memory, which is to say, only somewhat
accurate. However, memories of traumatic events usually have an accuracy that
exceeds that of other memories. Memories of trauma are also more enduring than other
memories. And there are certain aspects of traumatic memories that have been
empirically shown to have nearly perfect accuracy, such as a "weapon focus" in a
memory. This speaks to a smaller percentage of false positives [memories of things that
did not happen, or “FPs”] in memories of sexual trauma, albeit indirectly.
“In the end, when all the literature on the issue of recovered memories of sexual abuse
is taken into consideration it is likely that there are thousands of [true positives –
recovered memories of things that did occur or “TPs’] for every one FP, and that the
general public's perception of this ratio is highly skewed. In general, it has been
empirically demonstrated that people have a tendency to believe that a particular case
involves a FP rather than a TP, due to cognitive bias toward victim blaming, in an
attempt to feel safer about their personal worlds. This bias has led to many social and
legal barriers for victims of abuse. … The fact that we place such emphasis on the
existence of FPs in the instance of sexual abuse memories, and not on, say, FPs in
memories of burglary (which are alarmingly more common, and empirically well
demonstrated, again refer to Loftus for more on this) is more indicative of social bias,
and social dysfunction than on the real statistical occurrence and social impact of FPs in
sexual abuse memories.
“When we compare the statistical likelihood of FP memories of sexual abuse, with the
statistical likelihood of TP memory being disbelieved, I think it is clear that, as a society,
we are worrying about error in the wrong direction.”
I keep trying to underline the difference between a spontaneously recovered memory (which I'm willing to bet everyone has experienced) and a memory recovered via hypnosis. From what I recall of Beck's book, her memories were spontaneously recovered. Others claim that she engaged in self-hypnosis, but I do not remember that being part of her book.
Bob McCue's review:
www.mccue.cc/bob/documents/Relief Society.leaving%2 ... saints.pdf