Henry Otgaar, Mark L. Howe, Lawrence Patihis, Ivan Mangiulli, Olivier Dodier, Rafaële Huntjens, Elisa Krackow, Marko Jelicic, Steven Jay Lynn
{"title":"The neuroscience of dissociative amnesia and repressed memory: Premature conclusions and unanswered questions","authors":"Henry Otgaar, Mark L. Howe, Lawrence Patihis, Ivan Mangiulli, Olivier Dodier, Rafaële Huntjens, Elisa Krackow, Marko Jelicic, Steven Jay Lynn","doi":"10.1111/lcrp.12272","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>A heated debate exists on whether traumatic memories can be dissociated or repressed. One way in which researchers have attempted to prove the existence of dissociative amnesia or repressed memory is to examine whether claims of amnesia for traumatic events are associated with specific neural markers.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Here, we will argue that such neuroscientific examinations do not tell us whether traumatic memories can be unconsciously repressed or dissociated from consciousness, respectively.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>We discuss neuroscientific studies on dissociative amnesia and repressed memory and show that there are no reliable biological markers for dissociative amnesia and that the alleged involved brain areas are heterogenous among studies. Furthermore, we will demonstrate that it is unclear whether these studies truly involved patients with dissociative amnesia and that alternative explanations of dissociative amnesia were often not ruled out (e.g. malingering, organic amnesia). Moreover, we will make the case that the discussed patients in the studies do not meet the DSM-5 criteria for dissociative amnesia.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Taken together, neuroscientific research into dissociative amnesia does not present a convincing case for a biological basis of the purported memory loss.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":18022,"journal":{"name":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","volume":"30 S1","pages":"29-46"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lcrp.12272","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lcrp.12272","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
A heated debate exists on whether traumatic memories can be dissociated or repressed. One way in which researchers have attempted to prove the existence of dissociative amnesia or repressed memory is to examine whether claims of amnesia for traumatic events are associated with specific neural markers.
Methods
Here, we will argue that such neuroscientific examinations do not tell us whether traumatic memories can be unconsciously repressed or dissociated from consciousness, respectively.
Results
We discuss neuroscientific studies on dissociative amnesia and repressed memory and show that there are no reliable biological markers for dissociative amnesia and that the alleged involved brain areas are heterogenous among studies. Furthermore, we will demonstrate that it is unclear whether these studies truly involved patients with dissociative amnesia and that alternative explanations of dissociative amnesia were often not ruled out (e.g. malingering, organic amnesia). Moreover, we will make the case that the discussed patients in the studies do not meet the DSM-5 criteria for dissociative amnesia.
Conclusions
Taken together, neuroscientific research into dissociative amnesia does not present a convincing case for a biological basis of the purported memory loss.
期刊介绍:
Legal and Criminological Psychology publishes original papers in all areas of psychology and law: - victimology - policing and crime detection - crime prevention - management of offenders - mental health and the law - public attitudes to law - role of the expert witness - impact of law on behaviour - interviewing and eyewitness testimony - jury decision making - deception The journal publishes papers which advance professional and scientific knowledge defined broadly as the application of psychology to law and interdisciplinary enquiry in legal and psychological fields.