As
with the study of memory, some recovered memory experts have argued that empirical
research on hypnosis has little or no meaning for the practice of recovered memory
therapy because memory of trauma is fundamentally different from other memories.
On its surface, this argument makes a certain amount of intuitive sense. Memories
of being awakened at night by a loud noise, after all, are not the equivalent
of memories of being raped. It should be noted, however, that the research showing
the suggestibility of hypnosis and its ineffectiveness in uncovering accurate
memories has for years been applied to the question of whether hypnosis should
be used in a criminal investigation-where victims and witnesses have often experienced
trauma. Researchers have noted that when the subject of the memory is highly charged
or the subject more motivated to remember-to identify a suspect of a crime, for
instance- hypnosis may increase the inaccuracy of the memories retrieved. According
to Bowers and Professor Ernest Hilgard, of Stanford University, research shows
that hypnotically refreshed testimony should be corroborated independently: "In
effect, this means that under hypnosis a person's associative networks are activated
in a manner that is minimally or remotely tied to external reality constraints,
and maximally responsive to a person's idiosyncratic mnemonic themes, imaginings,
and fantasies. In other words, it is precisely under hypnotic conditions that
we are apt to learn more about a person's idiosyncratic and imaginal contributions
to memory reports, and less about the specific external events he or she is trying
to recall." The overwhelming bulk of both the laboratory and field reports
suggests that memories of witnessing or being victim to violent crimes are at
least as susceptible to manipulation and confabulation during hypnosis as other,
less disturbing, memories.
In addition, some researchers have
indeed created in test subjects highly traumatic "memories." However,
instead of building false beliefs about the subjects' childhoods (which would
be grossly unethical), researchers convinced subjects that the "memories"
they were to experience under hypnosis would be from previous incarnations. Using
past-life ruse, experimenters managed to avoid the possible damage to the client
of suggesting traumatic memory-belief for the person's actual childhood. Because
past-life regressions tend to deal with traumas and death in a supposed former
life, the technique dramatically illustrates that hypnosis can create believed-in
"memories" of trauma.
In the most applicable study,
Professor Nicholas Spanos and his colleagues at Carlton University, Canada, tested
subjects selected for their hypnotizability to see whether they would conform
to the suggestion of abuse in a past life.'5 Two groups of subjects were used.
Before past-life regression, one group was told that people who lived in past
times had much more abusive childhoods, and that the purpose of their past-life
experience was to find out more about abuse suffered by children in previous generations.
The other group of subjects was prompted with information that said nothing about
child abuse. A series of questions was asked of the subjects during their hypnotically
induced past-life fantasies, including: "Have you ever been abused by one
or both of your parents?" followed by "Have you ever been abused by
any other adult?" Those who said yes to either question were asked to elaborate.
The responses were then rated for severity by two researchers uninformed of the
purpose of the study.
The results were interesting for two
reasons. First, there was no significant difference between the two groups
in the number who reported abuse in their past-life fantasy. Eleven out of 14
in the abuse-prompted group said they were abused, as did 11 out of 15 of the
group that was given no suggestion about the abuse. The researchers found, however,
a significant difference in the severity of the abuse "remembered."
The researchers concluded that the group that was given the suggestion that they
were looking for abusive experiences "recalled higher levels of abuse when
enacting their past-life identity than did the corresponding subjects in the [other
group]." They concluded that "These findings are consistent with anecdotal
reports indicating that clients in psychotherapy sometimes confabulate complex
and extensive pseudomemories that are consistent with the expectations help by
their therapists." The fact that there was no significant difference between
the groups in their initial report of abuse is perhaps not so surprising when
one considers that the questions themselves might have functioned as implicit
suggestions. After all, a full three quarters of both groups confirmed that they
were somehow abused in their past-life childhoods.
In three
other studies reported in the same paper, researchers found that they could greatly
influence the subjects' confidence in the truth of their regression memories by
attesting to their own faith in the concept prior to hypnosis. When the hypnotist
prepped the subject by suggesting that his or her trip to another lifetime would
most likely be true, the subject would have a significantly greater likelihood
of reflecting that belief after hypnosis. "Subjects with equally intense
subjective experiences of a past life tended to interpret these experiences as
actual incarnations or as fantasies, depending on the . . . context provided by
the hypnotist."
Regardless of even this evidence,
Herman's objection that memories retrieved in the laboratory are distinct from
those retrieved in a clinical setting should, perhaps, not be dismissed so quickly.
No one in the laboratory has ever attempted what we believe is happening in therapy
settings. Like all good scientific tests, what the experiments surrounding hypnosis
are clearly intended to do is establish unambiguous causation. This requires that
the experiment be boiled down to very small, controllable variables. Done well,
however, these experiments allow the researcher to say with assurance that one
variable was responsible for changing another. To apply the results of these experiments
to the real world requires careful extrapolation. While these experiments do not
prove that complex memories of childhood can be implanted in patients, they do
seem to prove that singular beliefs about memory can be influenced. While laboratory
experiments have only intended to prove that a single subtle suggestion can be
implanted and internalized, the potential for such influence in therapy is manifold.
Directly or through questions therapists offer not one suggestion but thousands-each
of which can build on the response to the preceding suggestion.
Indeed,
there is evidence that what happens in therapy is a good deal more manipulative
than even this would suggest. While laboratory experimenters seldom hypnotize
their subjects more than once or twice, recovered memory patients are often hypnotized
weekly for periods of months or years. While experimenters are careful not to
influence the responses of the subject (excepting where such influence is part
of the experiment), recovered memory therapists often show no such concern, blatantly
suggesting histories of abuse, as in the case of Sue described at the beginning
of this chapter.
The literature on the dangers of the
use of hypnosis is not an obscure body of research that a reasonably competent
therapist might have simply missed. Warnings about the suggestibility of a hypnotized
patient, and the likelihood that he or she will classify what is imagined during
hypnosis as memory, have come from any number of sources including the courts,
the Journal of the American Medical Association, and prudent hypnotherapists.
-
Ofshe, Richard & Ethan Watters, Making Monsters: False Memories, Psychotherapy,
and Sexual Hysteria, Charles Scribner's Sons: New York, 1994.
=================================
Personal
Reflection Exercise #5
The preceding section contained information
about the creation of pseudo memories. Write three case study examples regarding
how you might use the content of this section in your practice.
Montgomery, N. V., & Rajagopal, P. (2018). Motivated reconstruction: The effect of brand commitment on false memories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 24(2), 159–179.
Patihis, L., Frenda, S. J., & Loftus, E. F. (2018). False memory tasks do not reliably predict other false memories. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice, 5(2), 140–160.
Smith, R. D., Holmberg, J., & Cornish, J. E. (2019). Psychotherapy in the #MeToo era: Ethical issues. Psychotherapy, 56(4), 483–490.
Ethics CEU QUESTION
11
Researchers have noted that when the subject of the memory is highly
charged or the subject more motivated to remember-to identify a suspect of a crime,
for instance- what may increase the inaccuracy of the memories retrieved? Record
the letter of the correct answer the <.
|
