Article written by Ovidiu Bobei.
Brief History:
Nearly 30 years ago, Crews (1995) introduced the term "memory wars" to illustrate a controversial debate over the existence of repressed memories. Repressed memories refer to lived events that become inaccessible and cannot be recalled due to an active process known as repression (Otgaar et al., 2019). The idea underlying this concept is that traumatic experiences are often so overwhelming that people use defense mechanisms to cope with them. One such mechanism is the automatic, unconscious repression of traumatic memories; thus, people neither remember nor consciously retain awareness of the experience (Loftus, 1993; McNally, 2005; Piper, Lillevik, & Kritzer, 2008).
From Then Until Now:
Scientific interest in what researchers and other mental health professionals know about memory function emerged because misconceptions about memory could lead to dangerous clinical practices and harmful treatment plans (Otgaar et al., 2019). In the 1990s, the phenomenon of repressed memories was widely accepted among mental health specialists and taken on with confidence. Consequently, even when clients could not remember trauma, such as sexual abuse, most therapists suggested that their unconscious might harbor repressed memories (Loftus, 1994; Loftus & Ketcham, 1994).
Current Beliefs Among Specialists:
Although it was assumed that the memory wars had concluded, with sufficient evidence casting doubt on the repressed memory phenomenon (Barden, 2016; McHugh, 2003; Paris, 2012), more recent data indicates otherwise. Magnussen and Melinder (2012) surveyed licensed psychologists and found that 63% of 540 specialists believed that recovered memories are real. Kemp et al. (2013) reached similar conclusions, with 89% of the 533 clinical psychologists interviewed considering that traumatic childhood memories (such as sexual abuse) could be “blocked” for many years. Furthermore, Patihis et al. (2014) found that 69.1% of 56 therapists agreed that traumatic memories are often repressed. These data demonstrate that the memory wars are far from over.
The Problem with the Repressed Memory Phenomenon:
Contrary to the notion that traumatic memories can be fully repressed, ample research suggests that trauma survivors often retain vivid memories of their experiences. For example, McNally (2005) noted that the central details of a traumatic event are usually well remembered, contradicting the idea that significant trauma leads to the total loss of lived experience (McNally, 2005). Moreover, the notion of apparently recovered memories suggests that experiences can be forgotten and "recovered" following retrieval cues, which contradicts the idea of memory being inaccessible to consciousness (Roediger & Bergman, 1998).
Therapeutic Techniques and Risks:
Following the rise of skepticism regarding the existence of repressed memories, questions arose about whether therapies aimed at recovering these memories (hypnosis or guided imagery therapy) yield verifiable results. A series of experimental studies have shown that hypnosis and guided imagery therapies can produce images that clients may easily mistake for authentic autobiographical memories (Ceci & Loftus, 1994; Lindsay & Read, 1994; Loftus & Ketcham, 1994; Lynn, Lock et al., 1997; Nash, 1987). These results reveal how susceptible memory is to false memory implantation, suggesting that memory-recovery-based therapies may be problematic treatment tools.
Conclusion:
The discussion about repressed memories continues to evolve. While some argue that the memory wars have ended, substantial evidence suggests otherwise. The implications for clinical practice are significant, as reliance on potentially unreliable memories can lead to severe consequences for both therapists and clients.
References:
Ceci, S. J., & Loftus, E. F. (1994). ‘Memory work’: A royal road to false memories? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 8(4), 351–364. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2350080405
Crews, F. C. (1995). The Memory Wars: Freud’s Legacy in Dispute. New York Review.
Goodman, G. S., Ghetti, S., Quas, J. A., Edelstein, R. S., Alexander, K. W., Redlich, A. D., Cordon, I. M., & Jones, D. P. H. (2003). A Prospective Study of Memory for Child Sexual Abuse: New Findings Relevant to the Repressed-Memory Controversy. Psychological Science, 14(2), 113–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.01428
Howe, M. L., Knott, L. M., & Conway, M. A. (2017). Memory and Miscarriages of Justice. Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315752181
Howe, M. L., & Knott, L. M. (2015). The fallibility of memory in judicial processes: Lessons from the past and their modern consequences. Memory (Hove, England), 23(5), 633–656. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2015.1010709
Kemp, S., Spilling, C., Hughes, C., & Pauw, K. de. (2013). Medically Unexplained Symptoms (MUS): What Do Current Trainee Psychologists, Neurologists and Psychiatrists Believe? 2013. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojmp.2013.21003
Lindsay, D. S., & Read, J. D. (1994). Psychotherapy and memories of childhood sexual abuse: A cognitive perspective. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 8(4), 281–338. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2350080403
Loftus, E. F. (1993). The reality of repressed memories. American Psychologist, 48(5), 518–537. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.48.5.518
Loftus, E. F. (1994). The repressed memory controversy. American Psychologist, 49(5), 443–445. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.49.5.443.b
Lynn, S. J., McNally, R. J., & Loftus, E. F. (2023). The Memory Wars Then and Now: The Contributions of Scott O. Lilienfeld. Clinical Psychological Science, 11(4), 725–743. https://doi.org/10.1177/21677026221133034
Magnussen, S., Melinder, A., Stridbeck, U., & Raja, A. Q. (2010). Beliefs about factors affecting the Reliability of eyewitness testimony: A Comparison of judges, jurors and the general public. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24(1), 122–133. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1550
Magnussen, S., & Melinder, A. (2012). What Psychologists Know and Believe about Memory: A Survey of Practitioners. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(1), 54–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1795
McNally, R. J. (2005). Remembering Trauma. Harvard University Press.
Merckelbach, H., Dekkers, T., Wessel, I., & Roefs, A. (2003). Amnesia, flashbacks, nightmares, and dissociation in aging concentration camp survivors. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41(3), 351–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(02)00019-0
Otgaar, H., Howe, M. L., Patihis, L., Merckelbach, H., Lynn, S. J., Lilienfeld, S. O., & Loftus, E. F. (2019). The Return of the Repressed: The Persistent and Problematic Claims of Long-Forgotten Trauma. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14(6), 1072–1095. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619862306
Paris, J. (2012). The Rise and Fall of Dissociative Identity Disorder. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 200(12), 1076. https://doi.org/10.1097/NMD.0b013e318275d285
Patihis, L., Frenda, S. J., & Loftus, E. F. (2018). False memory tasks do not reliably predict other false memories. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice, 5(2), 140–160. https://doi.org/10.1037/cns0000147
Roediger III, H. L., & Bergman, E. T. (1998). The controversy over recovered memories. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 4(4), 1091–1109. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.4.4.1091
Wagenaar, W. A., & Groeneweg, J. (1990). The memory of concentration camp survivors. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 4(2), 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2350040202
English 
Romanian