A pragmatic approach to early childhood memories: Shifting the focus from truth to clinical utility.

Abstract

The growing backlash against repressed trauma memories has led both clinicians and the lay public to question basic assumptions about the historical accuracy of autobiographical memory. While the popular media is flooded with stories of falsely induced trauma memories, many clinicians and theoreticians are feeling the need to redress many of the conceptual fallacies regarding the accuracy of early childhood memory (Ganaway, 1989;Loftus, 1993). This article reviews pertinent experimental literature in order to make a cogent case for Martin Mayman's (1968) conceptually sophisticated, yet immensely practical working model of reconstructive memory. The integration of cognitive and psychodynamic theory results in an appreciation for the psychologically revealing quality of early memories. Two case illustrations demonstrate the integration of theory with practice.This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Contemporary trauma theory and its relation to character.

“…Research indicates that what we remember is influenced by a number of factors, both at the time of the experience and at the time of recalling it. These influential factors include mood (Eich & Metcalfe, 1989), preexisting knowledge (Bransford, Barclay, & Franks, 1972; Bransford & Johnson, 1972), encoding strategies (Johnson, Raye, Foley, & Foley, 1981; Tulving & Thomson, 1973), contextual cues (Godden & Baddeley, 1975), the quality of retrieval cues (Loftus, 1975; Loftus & Hoffman, 1989; Manier, Piers, Greenstein, & Hirst, 1992), contemporaneous efforts to create a coherent sense of self across time (Barclay & DeCooke, 1988), and character style (Davis & Frank, 1979; Durso, Reardon, & Jolly, 1985; Fowler, 1994; Mayman, 1968; Paul, 1967; Piers, 1992/1995).…”

A return to the source: Rereading Freud in the midst of contemporary trauma theory.

“…Finally, considering memories reported by patients as literal and exact retellings of past events, underestimates the active and reconstructive aspects of memory. The malleability of memory is well-documented in the clinical and empirical literature (Fowler, 1994). Moreover, understanding a patient’s recollection of a trauma as referring only to an experience from the past, overlooks the possibility that the reported memories hold allusions to dynamics operating in the present.…”