解离性健忘症和压抑记忆的神经科学:过早的结论和未回答的问题

IF 2.2 2区 社会学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Henry Otgaar, Mark L. Howe, Lawrence Patihis, Ivan Mangiulli, Olivier Dodier, Rafaële Huntjens, Elisa Krackow, Marko Jelicic, Steven Jay Lynn
{"title":"解离性健忘症和压抑记忆的神经科学:过早的结论和未回答的问题","authors":"Henry Otgaar,&nbsp;Mark L. Howe,&nbsp;Lawrence Patihis,&nbsp;Ivan Mangiulli,&nbsp;Olivier Dodier,&nbsp;Rafaële Huntjens,&nbsp;Elisa Krackow,&nbsp;Marko Jelicic,&nbsp;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":"{\"title\":\"The neuroscience of dissociative amnesia and repressed memory: Premature conclusions and unanswered questions\",\"authors\":\"Henry Otgaar,&nbsp;Mark L. Howe,&nbsp;Lawrence Patihis,&nbsp;Ivan Mangiulli,&nbsp;Olivier Dodier,&nbsp;Rafaële Huntjens,&nbsp;Elisa Krackow,&nbsp;Marko Jelicic,&nbsp;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}","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

摘要

关于创伤性记忆是否可以分离或抑制,存在着激烈的争论。研究人员试图证明解离性健忘症或压抑记忆存在的一种方法是,检查对创伤性事件的健忘症是否与特定的神经标记物有关。在这里,我们将论证,这样的神经科学检查并没有告诉我们创伤记忆是否可以无意识地被压抑或从意识中分离。结果我们讨论了关于解离性遗忘和压抑记忆的神经科学研究,并表明解离性遗忘没有可靠的生物学标记,并且在研究中所涉及的脑区域是异质性的。此外,我们将证明尚不清楚这些研究是否真正涉及解离性健忘症患者,并且解离性健忘症的其他解释通常不被排除(例如,装病,器质性健忘症)。此外,我们将提出研究中讨论的患者不符合DSM-5分离性健忘症的标准。综上所述,对分离性失忆症的神经科学研究并没有为所谓的记忆丧失的生物学基础提出令人信服的案例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The neuroscience of dissociative amnesia and repressed memory: Premature conclusions and unanswered questions

The neuroscience of dissociative amnesia and repressed memory: Premature conclusions and unanswered questions

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
31
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.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信