Are Repressed and Recovered Memories Valid Phenomena?

Are Repressed and Recovered Memories Valid Phenomena?
Author’s Name
The Institutional Affiliation
Course Number and Name
Instructor Name
Assignment Due Date
Are Repressed and Recovered Memories Valid Phenomena?
Introduction
Repressed memories, or avoiding memories of traumatic events, is considered regular coping, but whether people can suppress memories and recover them later is debatable. Some people experience painful events and try to avoid the events’ memory in response to what happened. It is still controversial whether or not a person represses the memory of a traumatic event and retrieves it later or whether this phenomenon belongs to false memory syndrome. This article covers two perspectives on repressed memory analysis by exploring the facts and arguments presented by both sides in light of primary ethical considerations. Finally, the paper chooses which side the authors identify with and which supports contemporary research.
Detailed Description of Two Opposing Arguments
John Kihlstrom presents the first argument that claims of memory suppression and recovery are nothing more than medical folklore without scientific research or evidence (Kihlstrom, 2022). The sociologist argues that emotional stimulation caused by traumatic experiences can lead to the release of memory-enhancing stress hormones. Based on this, Kihlstrom presents that a traumatic event may trigger a vivid memory rather than a repressed memory (Kihlstrom, 2022). Its proponents include Lisa Butler, Steven Smith, David Greaves, and David Spiegel, who argue that severe stress can sometimes suppress a person’s memory and restore it later.
Kihlstrom believes that persuasive therapists, combined with popular media, can trigger repressed memories that people think they can recover later (Kihlstrom, 2020). Kihlstrom argues that because journalists often have a more tangible sense of responsibility than psychotherapists who claim to help recover blocked memories, there is so much evidence of false memories in the media that there is no reason to discredit these claims.
On the other hand, the studies of E. Loftus and other scientists make it possible to refute the psychotherapeutic doctrine, according to which repressed memories of traumas received in childhood determine a person’s behaviour and cause neurosis in him (Loftus & Teitcher, 2019). In particular, the research presented by Elizabeth Loftus describes the many factors that lead people to trust their therapists and restore repressed memories
As Elizabeth Loftus (2002) points out, in many places, the pros outweigh the cons, many are exonerated from DNA evidence after witness statements are condemned, and human memory is often imprecise (Loftus & Teitcher, 2019). False memories can also be implanted. Loftus argues that people form a perfect memory of an event by connecting what they saw or experienced with what they talked about afterward.
People who learn about events after they happened are generally more likely to incorporate them into their memories of whether they actually happened (Nichols & Loftus, 2019). This research proves futile in attempting to confirm claims of false memory based on anecdotal reports rather than empirical da...