The psychodynamic unconscious is thought to be the part of the mind that contains mental forces and content (desires, thoughts, and emotions) toward which selective attention cannot be directed, oftenbecause these mental forces and content cause too much distress when they reach awareness. In other words, those who use this concept believe that we place distressing mental events into the unconscious because we feel better if we are not aware of them. According to psychodynamic theorists, “repression” is the most important way we have of forgetting upsetting memories. Repression is defined as a mental process thatpushes mental content into the unconscious. Although removed from conscious awareness, the repressed feelings and memories still exist at the unconscious level and are thought to express themselves indirectly in various signs and symptoms, such as unusual sensations in the body, paralysis of parts of the body, depression, or overeating. In order to understand better what repression is, let’s look at an example. Fredrickson (1992) described the case of “Sarah,” who had a very unusual experience one morning that may have been caused by unconscious forces involving repression. According to Fredrickson:

Sarah was walking in the bright summer sunshine with her husband of six months. She was relaxed, enjoying her new husband, the beautiful day, and the brisk, invigorating exercise. She thought, “I have never been so happy.” Suddenly, she was gripped by a wave of pure terror. She could not breathe, and her whole body began to tremble. Paralyzed by fear, she was convinced she was dying. Her husband desperately tried to convince her that she was having a panic attack, not a premonition of her own death. (p. 22)

And Sarah undoubtedly was having a panic attack (feelings of terror and dread that occur along with various bodily symptoms such as a rapid heartbeat and trembling). Fredrickson was convinced that the cause of Sarah’s panic attack was a set of repressed memories of childhood sexual abuse. Because these memories can be so distressing, Fredrickson argued, a person will experience severe anxiety and even panic if the memories begin to surface into conscious awareness. Fredrickson claimed that this is what had happened to Sarah that bright summer morning. Sarah also showed other unusual behaviors, thoughts, and emotions that seemed consistent with possible effects of repressed memories of sexual abuse: she often became very anxious if the doors of bathroom stalls were closed; she experienced frequent nightmares; and she suffered from depression. According to many therapists, repressed memories may remain in the unconscious for years (even for the rest of one’s life); but it is thought that they typically indicate their presence by causing behaviors, emotions, and thoughts uncharacteristic for that person or that seem to erupt from nowhere. During therapy with Fredrickson, Sarah began to have fleeting images and, finally, full memories of being sexually abused by family members during her childhood. These remembrances seemed to confirm Fredrickson’s initial suspicion that Sarah had been sexually abused and had repressed the memories of this abuse.

            The fact that the evidence for repression primarily involves case studies should make you skeptical of the claims made by therapists who use this defense mechanism to explain abnormal thoughts, emotions, and behaviors. As we discussed in an earlier chapter, case studies have two major flaws: (1) they do not allow us to rule out the directionality problem or the third-variable problem; and (2) the biases of the researcher (or even the subject) have a large influence on the information collected and emphasized in the interpretation of a case study. The second problem may be the more important one here. In fact, we see some evidence for this problem in Fredrickson’s belief that sexual abuse during childhood occurs very often in her clients (and in the wider society, as well). This belief, which Fredrickson claimed developed only after her experiences with treating and lecturing about childhood sexual abuse, undoubtedly influenced many aspects of her therapeutic approach, including the questions she asked of her clients and the ways in which she interpreted their answers as well as their more spontaneous behaviors and utterances: “I began to listen to my clients with focused attention to the possibility of buried memories. Strange dreams, half-finished sentences, strong reactions to abuse issues, and imagery that persistently bothered my clients began to take on new meaning” (p. 15). All of these experiences (except for the upsetting imagery), however, are common ones in the general population. Is it possible that Fredrickson’s growing belief that many of her clients were sexually abused caused her to incorrectly interpret such common experiences and behaviors in people? Even if we answer, “yes,” to this question, however, it still does not explain the source of the abuse memories apparently retrieved by her clients. If these memories are accurate, then it seems reasonable to conclude that people who have experienced upsetting events use repression to protect themselves from the distress caused by remembering these events. There is evidence, however, that such memories are not always (or even often) completely accurate. In fact, there are good reasons to conclude that memories seemingly retrieved during certain types of therapy are often false. This evidence has led many researchers and therapists to criticize the concept of repression and the notion of the psychodynamic unconscious that goes along with it. Let’s examine some of this evidence and some of these criticisms.

The recovery of repressed memories through the use of hypnosis has been at the center of a major controversy in psychology since the 1980's. A number of researchers have claimed that, in many cases, what really is being remembered are mostly fictional stories that are the product of imagination on the part of clients, as well as suggestions from their therapists. This controversy has proved to be particularly intractable, not least because the claims involve the retrieval of memories from a part of the mind that is outside of conscious awareness. A similar problem occurs with the interpretation of dreams. Are dreams expressions of unconscious desires, conflicts, and concerns? Is a therapist's interpretation of a particular dream a correct description of those unconscious events? These questions are difficult to answer because there is no direct awareness of unconscious content.

Thus, we are left with the following question: how does one test claims about the unconscious? One question that has to be answered first is, what exactly is the unconscious? The evidence we collect when testing a claim will depend, in part, on the meaning of the concepts contained within the claim. For example, if the unconscious is defined as "a part of the mind to which we cannot direct selective attention," then the evidence we collect when testing claims about the unconscious has to involve something other than a person's conscious thoughts. In the case of Sarah, her unusual emotional reaction during her walk with her husband was taken as evidence of mental events in the unconscious.

Once we have adequately defined the concepts contained in a claim, there is an additional concern: when testing a claim, we need to be able to think of ways of showing that it may be false. For example, it is not often clear how we could show that a particular interpretation of a dream (in terms of unconscious concerns and desires) is false because we do not have direct access to the unconscious. If there is no way to show that the interpretation may be false, then there is no way to know if it may be true. In this lesson, you will learn about two requirements for scientifically testing claims about psychological phenomena: (1) the need to operationally define the concepts in a claim, and (2) the need to think of observations that could potentially falsify the claim.

SQ 4-15: Briefly describe the psychodynamic approach to the study of the unconscious. In your answer, define what is meant by psychodynamics, define what is meant by a defense mechanism, and explain what repression is thought to do. Why is it difficult to identify when repression is occurring? What is the evidence for repression? Describe two problems with this evidence.

Retrieval of Repressed Memories

As discussed above, those who accept the concept of repression believe that the memory of a distressing event can cause us to feel so much anxiety that we often will push it away from the conscious part of our minds, thereby eliminating our anxiety. Sigmund Freud — who used the concept of repression as the cornerstone of his approach to mental disorders—believed that everyone repressed various experiences from childhood. For example, infantile amnesia — the forgetting of much of our lives before the age of about four years — was attributed by Freud to repression caused by the anxiety surrounding intense sexual and aggressive impulses he believed we felt towards our parents during early childhood. Therapists inspired by Freud believe that, under certain circumstances, repressed memories can enter consciousness. For example, when a person experiences an event that has similarities to the repressed event, the implicit memory may break through the barrier of repression and enter consciousness. But the best way to become aware of a repressed memory, most believe, is to make repeated attempts to retrieve it during therapy. I will refer to the therapeutic procedures used to retrieve repressed memories as recovered-memory therapy. Recovered-memory therapy is performed in a variety of ways, but they all tend to share important similarities. (Although I will describe these similarities by discussing therapies for the retrieval of sexual-abuse memories, the techniques used in such therapies are the same as those used to recover other kinds of traumatic memory.)

There are two major steps to the therapeutic recovery of memories of sexual abuse: (1) An authority figure (often a therapist) suggests to a person that he/she probably has repressed memories of sexual abuse. (2) After the person (whom I will refer to as the “client”) accepts the possibility of abuse, he/she begins to use techniques thought to allow access to the unconscious. Let’s consider first the influence of suggestion. As I stated earlier, those who use the psychodynamic approach believe that repressed memories are expressed in the form of abnormal behaviors, thoughts, or emotions. For example, Fredrickson (1992) presented a checklist of symptoms to clients that she believed indicates the likelihood of repressed memories of sexual abuse. A sample of 24 of the 63 “common warning signals of repressed memories” follows:

• I showed no interest in sex until I was in my twenties.
• I feel as if there is something wrong or bad about my sexuality.
• I have had a period of sexual promiscuity in my life.
• I often have nightmares.
• I have difficulty falling or staying asleep.
• Sometimes I fear or sense that someone is in my bedroom.
• I remember vividly one or more nightmares from my childhood.
• I am frightened of one or more common household objects.
• Basements terrify me.
• I neglect my teeth.
• I have often taken foolish risks with my safety.
• I have had periods in my life when I couldn’t eat, or I had to force myself to eat.
• Certain foods or tastes frighten me or nauseate me.
• I hate my body.
• I avoid going to the gynecologist, or I dread it terribly.
• I have an addiction to drugs or alcohol.
• I do some things to excess, and I just don’t know when to quit.
• There have been times when I was very suicidal.
• I have unexplained bouts of depression.
• I identify with abuse victims in the media, and often stories of abuse make me want to cry.
• Sometimes really violent or strange pictures flash through my mind.
• I startle easily.
• I can’t remember much of my childhood.
• I space out or daydream.
  (Fredrickson, 1992, pp. 48-51)

A very important question first needs to be answered before we can use this list to detect repressed memories of sexual abuse: are the items in this list valid indicators of repressed memories of sexual abuse? The answer seems to be “no.” There are two serious problems with this list and others like it: (a) no controlled research has ever shown that sexual abuse is more likely to lead to this cluster of problems than other kinds of traumatic (or even nontraumatic) experiences; (b) no controlled research has ever shown that repressed memories of sexual abuse (or any other traumatic event) lead to such problems. In fact, many of the problems are ones that anyone in the general population might show (I placed an asterisk after each of the “signs” that seemed to me to be common). It seems obvious that the sole purpose of this list is to suggest to clients that they may have repressed memories. It is hard to avoid this conclusion after reading the instructions for the proper use of the list:

Check each item that applies to you, even if in a different way than the question indicates. There is no specific number of checkmarks needed to “prove” you have repressed memories. This list is only to help you start thinking about warning signals you may have missed or to validate signals that you feel might be clues to your abuse.
No single item is a certain indicator of repressed memories. People who have not been sexually abused have nightmares, overeat, and sometimes hate their bodies, but if you check several times in each category or nearly all the items in a single category, you will want to consider the possibility that you have repressed memories. (Fredrickson. 1992, p. 47; emphasis added)

It is likely, however, that almost anyone will check off a large number of items (especially considering that one of the instructions states that you should check off any “item that applies to you, even if in a different way than the question indicates”). In trying to be conservative, I still checked off 31 of the 62 items that applied to me (since I have no reason to go to a gynecologist, I didn’t count that item; but the thought of doing so still frightens me, so perhaps I should include it). In fact, I checked off 70% of the items in one of her seven categories (Fredrickson suggested that checking off nearly all the items in a single category was an important sign of repressed memories). If I had been seeing a therapist who believed this checklist was a valid indicator of repressed memories of sexual abuse, it is probable that he/she would have informed me that I am likely to have such memories. Such a suggestion coming from a respected authority figure can have a powerful effect on people in therapy: either they will terminate therapy immediately (perhaps because they fear what they will discover) or they will begin an active search for their repressed memories.

            The second major step in recovered-memory therapy involves repeated attempts to become aware of repressed memories. There are many techniques used to recover repressed memories. Most of these techniques emphasize two general procedures: (a) clients are encouraged to imagine the traumatic events they are suspected of having repressed; (b) clients are encouraged to reinterpret mundane experiences as direct expressions of repressed memories and are told that, if they focus on these experiences, they will be led to the memories. With regard to the first procedure, clients try to fill in the details of what they believe has happened to them by using various techniques such as the following: they tell a story about what they think happened to them; they try to focus on the details of any visual images they have (ones they believe to be partial memories of actual events); or they free associate (that is, they state out loud everything that is going through their minds without censoring themselves). With regard to the second procedure, therapists try to show their clients that everyday experiences involving their thoughts, emotions, or bodily sensations are expressions of the unconscious that will help them to remember their sexual abuse. For example, clients may recount dreams for their therapist, who will then lead them through interpretations that suggest that elements of the dream are actually parts of a repressed memory; the therapist may help clients to interpret normal or abnormal bodily sensations as “body memories” of sexual abuse; or clients who experience frequent feelings of sadness and anger may be encouraged to interpret these emotions as a normal response to repressed memories that will help them (if these emotions are expressed completely) to release the associated memories. Along with these two general procedures, clients in therapy often are subjected to hypnotic inductions that are thought to create a state of consciousness (a “hypnotic trance”) that allows direct access to unconscious material. I will examine the use of hypnosis later in this chapter.

SQ 4-16: List the two major steps of recovered-memory therapy. What is one way in which it is suggested to clients that they might have repressed memories? What is a problem with this technique? Briefly describe the two major procedures used to help people retrieve their repressed memories.

Criticisms of the Concept of Repression
Now that I have given a brief overview of recovered-memory therapy, I will examine it in light of what I discussed above about the formation and retrieval of long-term memories. Although the concept of repression is widely accepted among therapists and the general public, the evidence for it is not very good. There is one major problem with most research on repression: because repression is thought to work unconsciously—and, thus, has no unambiguous (clear) effects on our conscious mental events and behaviors—it is difficult to find examples of this defense mechanism that cannot be explained in other ways. One needs controlled research to rule out the various possibilities. As I stated earlier, the evidence supporting repression consists mostly of clinical case studies that use some version of recovered-memory therapy. Case studies, however, involve the use of uncontrolled research situations. The results of few (if any) laboratory studies using adequate controls give support to the concept of repression. As Holmes (1990) concluded in his review of decades of research on repression: “despite over sixty years of research involving numerous approaches by many thoughtful and clever investigators, at the present time there is no controlled laboratory evidence supporting the concept of repression” (p. 96). He stated that clinicians often dismiss these studies and instead focus on evidence involving case studies. Holmes, however, correctly argued that case studies do not provide adequate evidence for any claim, including claims about the existence of repression. He suggested in jest that anyone using the concept of repression should also provide the following cautionary label: “Warning. The concept of repression has not been validated with experimental research and its use may be hazardous to the accurate interpretation of clinical behavior” (p. 97).

Because of this lack of controlled experimental evidence for repression, cognitive psychologists have questioned whether or not repression actually occurs. They are especially concerned about those "memories" that return after weeks, months, or years of therapeutic work. They base their criticism on the evidence for reconstruction theory showing that, when we retrieve a long-term memory, we reconstruct it by combining the fragments of information contained in the activated engram with the large amount of information contained in activated schemas. In this view, as I stated earlier, each reconstructed memory is always a combination of fact and fiction. In other words, according to reconstruction theory, all of our memories are inaccurate to various degrees. When a person is strongly encouraged to retrieve memories of events that may not have occurred (as they are in recovered-memory therapy), it seems possible that memory reconstruction could lead to predominantly false memories—memories that include true but irrelevant details surrounded by a fictional story. For example, clients receiving recovered-memory therapy often are encouraged to visualize traumatic childhood events that they suspect may have occurred. It is plausible that such a technique could activate schemas that then might be incorporated into the reconstructed “memory.” Ofshe and Watters (1994) suggested that the process could occur something like this:

Picture an elephant. Imagine an apple. Now spend a moment visualizing an image of being sexually assaulted by one of your parents. It is an often distressing trick of the mind that it will create any event regardless of our desire to visualize that event. What separates an imagined image from a memory image is not a simple matter, for even imagined events are themselves largely built from memory. Our ability to imagine an elephant would be impossible if we didn’t have a memory of having seen an elephant or a picture of the creature. Similarly, our ability to ... imagine a sexual assault by a parent would also come from an amalgam of memories. To create this image we might use recollections of our parents’ physical appearances and of ourselves as children. We might place the scene in the memory of our childhood room. To create the action of the scene, we might use memories of other people’s descriptions of sexual assaults or of abuse scenes depicted in books or movie dramas. In the end, all the pieces of the imagined event would have something of the weight of memory. (p. 107)

All these various schemas might be combined with bits of remembered events from childhood (for example, the night one of your parents came into your bedroom to open your windows after the air conditioner broke) to produce a remembrance that contains a small slice of truth and a large amount of fiction — a remembrance that accords with the therapist’s suggestion that you have repressed memories of traumatic events. The question we now need to answer is this: are we so good at filling in gaps in our memories that we can create a traumatic memory that is almost completely false (and without realizing that we are doing this) when we are encouraged to do so by an authority? Can we do so even when no therapist has influenced our remembrances? Let’s examine some of the research that addresses these questions.

False Memories of Traumatic Events

There is much anecdotal evidence to demonstrate that we are able to create false memories of traumatic events in everyday life. For example, Elizabeth Loftus, a well-known memory researcher, described a false memory she developed in adulthood of a traumatic event from her adolescence. When she was 14 years old, she went on a vacation with her mother and her aunt to visit a relative. One morning, she awoke and was told that her mother had drowned in the swimming pool. Loftus did not see her mother’s body because it had been found by her aunt before she had awakened. Nevertheless, many years later, when an uncle misremembered that Loftus had found her mother’s body, she quickly constructed a false memory:

Thirty years later ... a relative informed me that I was the one who found my mother in the pool. After the initial shock — No, it was Aunt Pearl, I was asleep, I have no memory — the memories began to drift back, slow and unpredictable.... I could see myself, a thin, dark-haired girl, looking into the flickering blue-and-white pool. My mother, dressed in her nightgown, is floating face down. “Mom? Mom” I ask the question several times, my voice rising in terror. I start screaming. I remember the police cars, their lights flashing, and the stretcher with the clean, white blanket tucked in around the edges of the body.... For three days my memory expanded and swelled. Then, early one morning, my brother called to tell me that my uncle had checked his facts and realized he'd made a mistake: His memory, it turned out, had temporarily failed him. Now he remembered (and other relatives confirmed) that Aunt Pearl found my mother's body in the swimming pool. (Loftus & Ketcham, 1994, p. 39)

Loftus explained that all “it took was a suggestion, casually planted, and off I went ... eagerly searching for supporting information” (p. 40). Suggestion is probably the most important factor in the construction of false or inaccurate memories. Because of her uncle’s off-hand suggestion that she had found her mother’s body, Loftus was quickly led to construct a vividly detailed memory that was false in almost all of its details.

As another example, we can examine a false memory of a traumatic event constructed by Jean Piaget, the famous Swiss psychologist who developed a very influential theory of cognitive development:

One of my first memories would date, if it were true, from my second year. I can still see, most clearly, the following scene, in which I believed until I was fifteen. I was sitting in my pram [a baby carriage], which my nurse was pushing in the Champs Elysées [a famous avenue in Paris], when a man tried to kidnap me. I was held in by the strap fastened round me while my nurse bravely tried to stand between me and the thief. She received various scratches, and I can still see them on her face.... When I was about fifteen, my parents received a letter from my former nurse...she wanted to confess her past faults, and in particular to return the watch she had been given as a reward.... She had made up the whole story.... I, therefore, must have heard, as a child, the account of this story, which my parents believed, and projected into the past in the form of a visual memory. (Quoted in Loftus & Ketcham, 1994, pp. 76-77)

Perhaps you have memories from your earliest years. Piaget’s anecdote shows that such memories may be constructed from stories you have heard from others (especially those of trusted family members). These stories would act as suggestions for the development of memories that, although usually true (since the events probably did occur), were not encoded from your own first-hand experience of the events. Instead, they were encoded from the remembrances of others. It would be impossible at this point in your life to decide whether these memories were actual remembrances or were constructed “second-hand” based on the stories you heard from others. Nevertheless, if you have any detailed memories that date from before about 3 1/2 years of age, it is probable (though not certain) that they are fabrications constructed second-hand.

But anecdotes such as those told by Loftus and Piaget can only suggest possible directions for more controlled research: with anecdotes, one cannot rule out alternative explanations of a phenomenon. Therefore, if we are to reach any firm conclusions, we need to examine the results of well-controlled research (that is, we need to regulate the research situation in such a way that all alternative explanations but one are excluded). Loftus, her colleagues, and her students did this with a series of formal and informal studies that we may call the “lost-in-the-shopping-mall” studies. For each subject in these investigations, an older family member suggested to the subject that he/she had been lost in a shopping mall at the age of five years (interviews with family members were used to confirm that this had never actually happened to the subject). For example, a student in one of Loftus’ courses tried it with his 14-year-old brother, Chris. He told Chris that he had been lost in a shopping mall in Spokane when he was five years old, and that he had been found by a “tall, oldish man” who might have been wearing a flannel shirt. This was an incident that had never happened (an interview with the mother confirmed this). A few weeks later, after he had been encouraged by his brother to try to remember the incident, Chris had developed a very detailed false memory:

I think I went over to look at the toy store, the Kay-Bee toys and, uh, we got lost, and I was looking around and I thought, “Uh-oh. I’m in trouble now.” You know. And then I ... I thought I was never going to see my family again. I was really scared, you know. And then this old man, I think he was wearing a blue flannel, came up to me ... he was kind of old. He was kind of bald on top ... he had like a ring of gray hair ... and he had glasses. (Loftus & Ketcham, 1994, p. 98)

When Chris finally was told that he had never been lost in the shopping mall, he did not believe it. His memory of the imagined incident was so vivid that he still felt as if it must be true: “I remember being lost and looking around for you guys.... I do remember that.... And then crying and Mom coming up and saying. ‘Where were you? Don’t you ever do that again!’” (p. 99). But being able to create a false traumatic memory in a single case is not evidence for the claim that such a process occurs in many people. Thus, several other people, ranging in age from eight to 42 years, were given suggestions by older family members that they had been lost in malls or stores at the age of five or six. All five developed false memories of the imagined incident. For example, 42-year-old Bill was told by his older sister that he had been lost in a department store when he was a young child. He developed a vivid false memory: “I felt panicky — where were Mom and Linda? I felt scared ... I remember going up and down the stairway at Sears. I remember the elevator bell at Sears” (p. 99). But again, these examples were not very well-controlled: somewhat different suggestions had been made to each subject. Thus, Loftus and Pickrell (1995) designed a tightly controlled experimental situation in which they attempted to replicate these findings. They found that 29% of the subjects constructed false memories after an older family member had suggested to them that they had been lost in a shopping mall at five years of age. When one considers that the encouragement to develop a false memory was very mild compared to what occurs in recovered-memory therapy, the proportion developing false memories of the imaginary incident is quite high.

In general, we can conclude that false memories are most likely to develop when the following two conditions occur:

(1) an authority suggests to a person that he/she has experienced an event;
(2) the person tries repeatedly to remember the suggested event (especially by visualizing what they think might have happened).

Nevertheless, even when these two influences are operating, many people still will not develop false memories. Thus, there must also be other factors that influence their development (for example, psychological factors such as the ability to visualize easily). We must also be cautious about going too far with our conclusions about false memories: although many people develop false memories, this cannot prove that repression never occurs. All we can conclude is that we should never accept a “recovered memory” at face value. There are two problems with doing this: (a) we know that false memories of traumatic events can occur; (b) there is nothing that distinguishes true from false recovered memories (they can be equally vivid and believed with equivalent amounts of certainty). If a person has no memory of an event until many years after its occurrence, and this remembrance occurs only after an authority has suggested the existence of this memory, there is good reason to doubt the accuracy of the recovered memory. The authority behind a suggestion can be of many types. For example, the suggestion may come from therapists, family members, authors of popular books or magazine articles, or guests on television talk shows. In addition, support groups for those who believe that they have experienced various traumatic events (such as sexual abuse, alien abductions, or membership in a satanic cult) often exert subtle pressures on members to remember events that may not have occurred. Because a primary purpose of such support groups is to help members recall forgotten events, a person who cannot remember will tend to be ignored by other group members, whereas someone who can recall vivid details will tend to be given a great deal of attention. Thus, it can be socially rewarding to “remember” (that is, to construct a false memory), especially for the lonely, depressed, or anxious people who often make up such groups. On the other hand, if you have always remembered that a traumatic event has occurred to you (that is, you have never forgotten it even if you have tried not to remember it on occasions), then there is good reason to believe that the event did occur.

SQ 4-17: According to what you know about reconstruction theory, what is the major problem with pushing someone to retrieve memories of forgotten events (or events that may not have occurred in the first place)? Describe some anecdotal evidence for the claim that we can develop false memories of traumatic events. Describe some evidence from controlled experimental research for the claim that we can develop false memories of traumatic events. List the two essential conditions for the construction of a false memory of a traumatic event. Why should we never immediately accept the truth of a memory that has been retrieved during recovered-memory therapy?