The Effects of Memory Recovery Techniques on Jurors’ Perceptions of Recovered Memories

Abstract

The current study examined the impact of memory recovery techniques (guided imagery and dream interpretation) on mock jurors' perceptions of recovered memories. Participants (N = 181) were randomly assigned to read one of four vignettes representing a therapist who uncovered memories of child sexual abuse in an adult female client using guided imagery, dream interpretation, technique concealed, or memories were continuous as opposed to recovered. Participants then responded to a series of questions regarding plaintiff credibility, defendant guilt, and external influences. Lower ratings of plaintiff credibility and defendant guilt emerged, along with higher ratings of external influence when guided imagery or dream interpretation was used by the therapist compared to when the technique was concealed. The same pattern of findings held when the dependent variables of interest reflected credible vs. not credible and guilty vs. not guilty decisions. The current study highlights the necessity of informing jurors as to the processes by which memories are recovered.

Perceptions of recovered memory therapy: Hindsight bias effects on judgments of memory veracity and therapist competence and responsibility.

“…While Myers et al's (2015) findings paint a different picture than other studies on RMT perceptions (e.g., Coleman et al, 2001;Krackow & Long, 2016;Nachson et al, 2007) in which participants were more likely to mistrust memories emanating from RMT and doubt the competence of the therapist, there are two possible explanations for this discrepancy. In Myers et al (2015), participants were provided with greater detail regarding RMT techniques, as they witnessed a videotape enactment of a therapist using RMT with a client.…”

“…They also viewed the therapist as less competent and more responsible for causing harm when hypnosis was involved. Most recently, Krackow and Longo (2016) found that participants who read case scenarios were significantly less likely to render guilty verdicts based on recovered memory testimony when the memories were the result of guided imagery than when they arose from therapy with no mention of which recovery method was used. Furthermore, the memory was significantly more likely to have been perceived as created by the therapist when guided imagery techniques were used.…”

“…It is noteworthy that in previous studies that assess public attitudes toward RMT (both in a survey format was well as in a trial format), the techniques used in RMT are either not described in great detail (e.g., Coleman et al, 2001), or the descriptions are detailed but the written format (e.g., Krackow & Longo, 2016) may not allow individuals to witness how recovered memory techniques unfold. Therefore, our understanding of public perceptions of RMT is based on studies in which participants may have incomplete experience with RMT.…”

Jurors' Perceptions of Preschoolers and Younger School Aged Children's Memory Errors

“…"on a scale from 1 (not at all credible) to 10 (there is no doubt in my mind that this child is credible") Tessier & Krackow, 2013]. The participants also answered three questions about defendant guilt, likelihood that the defendant committed the act in question, and how responsible was the defendant for the alleged crime (Tessier & Krackow, 2013;Krackow, 2016). There were also two questions that ask about external influences on the testimony provided by the witness.…”

“…There were also two questions that ask about external influences on the testimony provided by the witness. These questions assessed if the participant believed that the witnesses memories were created by the influence of other people and the likelihood that the child's accusations in this case is a result of the child being suggestible (Orcutt et al, 2001;Krackow, 2016;Krackow, 2018). There was a dichotomous question where the participants indicate if they believed the defendant was guilty or not guilty.…”