ABSTRACT
The subject of recovered memories is at the center of the so-called false memory debate, sometimes referred to as the “recovered memory debate,” and even the “memory wars,” all terms referring to an intellectual and emotional conflict that has captured both scholarly and popular interest and concern. A web search using the search term recovered memory yields well over a million results dealing with the subject. A recent bibliography of articles listed over 800 published papers relevant to the topic. In many ways the subject of recovered memories seems to be less about memory per se and more about validation, that is, on the one hand, validation of victims’ memories of traumatic events that truly occurred, and, on the other hand, validation of the innocence of people who have been wrongfully accused of being abusers. On the front lines of the memory wars have been clinicians and therapists who typically (but by no means always) have been more vocal about concerns with victims of abuse who recover memories, versus experimentalists who typically (but not always) have expressed more concern over those who have been wrongfully accused based on false memories. Because both of these concerns are so important, we will try to address both as we discuss what recovered memories are, what is known about them, what is controversial about recovered memories, and what is not yet known about them.
