>
On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, Jim Guinee posted a news report that included
> And more from the item:
> ``There is now consistent evidence that 'False Memory Syndrome' cannot
> explain all, or even most, examples of recovered memories of trauma,'' the
> British Psychological Society said in a statement.
To which Stephen responded
I suspect a misprint here. I somehow doubt that the BPS would be
endorsing this study. But I suppose they could. On the other hand, the
British Royal College of Psychiatrists (1998) strongly discouraged the
use of recovered memory, primarily because of the danger of false
memories. Murray (1998) summarized their report as stating:
--------------snip----------
Actually, it is not a misprint but it is also not complete. The next sentence in the
statement attributes the conclusion to the authors of the article not the British
Psychological Society itself. The next sentence reads
These were the findings of a study published on Tuesday 14 March, in the British
Journal of Clinical
Psychology, by psychologist Dr Bernice Andrews, of Royal Holloway, University of
London, and her
colleagues.
Omitting this sentence misleads the reader to conclude that the statement is the
position of the BPS rather than a summary of the findings of a study that was recently
published.
The entire BPS press release can be found at
http://www.bps.org.uk/PressRel.nsf/0a200f3166135dc08025678a004e8868/5afbdf01e45d2b9080256896003c33ed?OpenDocument
Richard Platt
St. Mary's College of Maryland
