Are the "memory wars" over? A scientist-practitioner gap in beliefs about repressed memory

Area of Science:

• Cognitive Psychology
• Clinical Psychology
• Memory Science

Background:

• The 1990s "memory wars" highlighted a controversy regarding the reliability of repressed memories.
• Disagreement between clinicians and memory scientists on repressed memory validity has been a long-standing issue.
• Understanding the current landscape of beliefs about repressed memory is crucial for addressing the science-practice gap.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate whether the disagreement about repressed memory reliability persists between different groups.
• To compare current beliefs about repressed memory with those expressed in past studies.
• To assess the gap between memory beliefs of clinical psychology researchers and practitioners.

Main Methods:

• Study 1: Assessed beliefs about repressed memory in undergraduates and correlated beliefs with critical-thinking ability.
• Study 2: Compared current beliefs of mainstream clinicians with historical data from the 1990s.
• Compared belief levels across groups including research-oriented psychologists and memory experts.

Main Results:

• Undergraduates demonstrated high rates of belief in repressed memory.
• Higher critical-thinking ability was linked to increased skepticism about repressed memories.
• Mainstream clinicians today show less belief in repressed memory compared to the 1990s.
• Memory experts and research-oriented psychologists expressed greater skepticism than other groups.

Conclusions:

• A significant gap persists between the memory beliefs of clinical psychology researchers and practitioners.
• Findings have implications for resolving the science-practice gap in mental health.
• Dissemination of memory research in professional training is essential for aligning beliefs and practices.