-Caveat Lector- Dear List, Traumatic and non-traumatic memory are different and the data in this study does not prove that traumatic memory can be changed. To possibly change traumatic memory, a variety of factors have to be in place : Information paraphrased from "Memory, Trauma Treatment, and the Law" by Brown, Scheflin and Hammond, W.W. Norton and Co. New York and London, C 1998 (http://www.wwnorton.com) Page 370-381 The base rates for memory commission errors are quite low, at least in professional trauma treatment. The base rates in adult misinformation studies run between zero and 5 percent for adults and between 3 - 5 percent for children. Out of about seven to 10% of the general population that may be highly hypnotizable, four to 6 percent of high hypnotizable subjects may "produce hypnotic psuedomemories for peripheral details (of a memory) in response to suggestions" in a waking state or hypnotized with controlled situational influence. The 4-6 percent may rise in terms of report rates to 80% under some conditions of social influence. Extreme social influence can be compared to brainwashing or social influence to the following criteria, several of which must happen for the possibility of an untrue memory to occur: patient is highly suggestible (in terms of memory), with low to moderate suggestibility a therapeutic situation must contain a number of the following: patient is quite uncertain about the past event, suggestions of peripheral details (not central plot actions of a memory), source credibility (an authority figure), patient bias (previous information), authority figure bias (has set belief about what happened), systematic misleading (rather than free recall), emotional manipulation (blame or rejection for not producing the desired result or praise for the desired result), behavioral response (individual journal or oral narrative to group of trauma or action against perpetrators), milieu control (total information control in and out of therapeutic or other context) and psychophysiological manipulation (breaking down the subject's defenses, assaults self esteem or person's core or causes subject to regress). However, some child abuse interrogations might come close to some of the above conditions. Those that have retracted claims due to influence from their accused families, if they have internalized the systematic information of the FMSF, and were coached by FMSF members may also meet many of the above criteria of social influence. IMO, it sounds like most people would almost have to be in a cult or in a cult like situation or under considerable duress to produce an untrue memory. Information on Loftus is below. Sincerely, Neil Brick For articles critiquing research by Elizabeth Loftus, see: http://users.owt.com/crook/memory/ Copies of "Lost in a shopping mall - A breach of professional ethics" and "Logical fallacies and ethical breaches" are now available. Send an E-mail request to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and ask for an attachment--or provide a mailing address and copies will be mailed to you. These articles provide scholarly critiques of Dr. Elizabeth Loftus' "lost in the mall" study. The first article examines the study from a methodological and ethical standpoint. The second article examines Loftus' published response to this article and brings up further questions regarding the mall study. The articles were published in Volume 9, Number 1 of "Ethics & Behavior," a peer-reviewed journal. Published by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. 10 Industrial Avenue, Mahwah, NJ 07430; Phone: (201) 236-9500. from http://www.feminista.com/v1n9/false-memory.html (has a lot of info on Loftus) "For example, Elizabeth Loftus accused Kenneth Pope, a respected memory and trauma researcher, in the APA journal Clinical Psychology of being "wildly reckless" in an area of ethics. Her claim was later investigated by the journal and found to be false. The Fall 1997 issue of the journal published a correction and apology for the "false statement disparaging Dr. Pope's ethics". (POPE LETTER ETC) It is disheartening to observe the FMSF, which in its newsletters and publications continually emphasizes the importance of scientific discourse, actively promoting such accusations." "In further evidence of questionable activity by FMSF board members, Notes from the Controversy (Treating Abuse Today, Nov./ December 1995, Jan./ Feb. 1996), discusses ethics complaints filed with the American Psychological Association against Elizabeth Loftus regarding her article "Remembering Dangerously", which was published in a 1995 issue of Skeptical Inquirer, a publication of the Committee for the Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP)." False Memory Syndrome Foundation (FMSF) Advisory Board member Elizabeth Loftus published a false accusation, based on incomplete information, that a colleague was "wildly reckless" in an important area of ethics. Her claim was later carefully investigated, reviewed, and evaluated in light of the facts by the American Psychological Association (APA) journal that had published this charge (Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice) and by the APA structure responsible for the content of this journal. Her claim about the colleague's ethics was found to be false. The Fall, 1997 issue (vol. 4, #3) of Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice contains, prior to the first article, a page headed CORRECTION NOTICE AND APOLOGY. http://kspope.com/apology.shtml quotes from: "Memory, Trauma Treatment, and the Law" by Brown, Scheflin and Hammond," (ISBN 0-393-70254-5) W.W. Norton and Co. New York and London, C 1998 (http://www.wwnorton.com) Page 365-366. The book has excellent information about memory studies and a chapter called "The False Logic of the False Memory Controversy and the Irrational Element in Scientific Research on Memory" (pg. 382) >From chapter 11: "A Critical Evaluation of the Memory Scientific Experiments," section: "WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT MEMORY FALLIBILTY?" "Loftus's claim that human memory in general is fallible (1979a,b) and that therefore memories recovered in psychotherapy are equally fallible (1993) is both overstated and oversimplified (Koss et al., 1995)." The conclusion that "negative emotional arousal hinders accurate...memory" (Loftus, 1980, p.78) is misleading..." Loftus' conclusion only applies "to laboratory simulation studies of memory for complex visual presentations" when a certain type of information is measured. "These simulation studies rarely show memory fallibility with respect to the emotional arousing event itself." Generalizing findings on memory fallibilty are misleading when "certain types of visual information presented in the laboratory" are transferred to the "autobiographical memory of patients in psychotherapy." "....The early studies... led to a distorted view of memory fallibilty because they were biased toward assessing memory performance in terms of" all the information contained in "a complex visual stimulus presentation (Clifford & Hollin, 1981; Clifford & Scott, 1978)" or because they looked for "peripheral background details..." "More sophisticated studies...have clearly demonstrated that memory is well and accurately retained for the gist of a central action... or a negative emotional event even over long retention intervals," where "only the peripheral background details are poorly retained." This compares to "...Bartlett's (1932) original studies on memory for the War of the Ghosts,... gist memory was well preserved while memory for minor details was highly inaccurate." "General, overstated claims about memory fallibility" don't take into consideration "the complex interaction of variables that affect memory performance." <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
