Suggestibility and False Memory Formation in Psychopathology

暗示性面试技巧可以极大地改变人们的选择，有时会产生实质性的影响（Wade et al.，2010; Nash & Wade，2009）。然而，就科学所示，没有人能对暗示性技术和记忆扭曲免疫，某些认知能力和个性特征使一些人特别容易（Patihis et al.，2013年）。精神病理学的临床和亚临床症状，特别是创伤后应激障碍（PTSD）和抑郁症，可能使人们容易受到预防性记忆扭曲的影响，但研究精神病理学和记忆力之间的联系的研究很少。认知心理学文献中的这种差距令人惊讶，因为患有创伤后应激障碍或抑郁症的人经常需要在临床环境中准确和反复地选择情感，个人经历（例如，当寻求治疗时）或法律的背景（例如，作为证人、受害者、寻求庇护者作证时）。目前的项目将探讨创伤后应激障碍，抑郁症和创伤暴露之间的关系，以及预防引起的记忆扭曲。拟议的研究将分三个方面进行。第1条将确定错误记忆发展的流行模型是否可以解释精神病理学中的记忆错误。一系列实验将检验这些模型的理论预测。Strand 2将探索元记忆在经历精神病理学症状的人的错误记忆发展中的作用。例如，我们将研究记忆不信任是否会影响精神病理学中的防御诱导的错误记忆的形成，如果是这样，这种不信任如何影响个体对记忆的信心表达。第3条将调查从业者对精神病理学个体记忆报告的信念。为了成功地将第1和第2条的发现转化为政策和实践，了解法律的和临床专业人员如何从精神病理学个体中引出和评估记忆报告至关重要。错误记忆发展背后的认知过程是复杂的。拟议的研究旨在实质性地推进对临床背景下错误记忆形成的理论理解。此外，它将强调从业者如何设计检索上下文，促进准确的记忆，从而为加强政策和实践提供了一个经验基础。鉴于记忆证据在临床和法律的背景下受到严重依赖，因此了解记忆在什么情况下最脆弱，并创造最小化错误的条件至关重要。要做到这一点，我们需要更好地理解精神病理学的症状如何与驱动错误记忆产生的过程相互作用。

Suggestive interviewing techniques can dramatically alter what people recollect, sometimes with substantial ramifications (Wade et al., 2010; Nash & Wade, 2009). Whereas no-one, as far as science has shown, is immune to suggestive techniques and memory distortions, certain cognitive abilities and personality characteristics make some people especially prone (Patihis et al., 2013). Clinical and subclinical symptoms of psychopathology, particularly Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and depression, could predispose people to suggestion-induced memory distortions, yet research examining the link between psychopathology and suggestibility is scarce. This gap in the cognitive psychology literature is surprising given that people with PTSD or depression are often required to accurately and repeatedly recollect emotional, personal experiences within clinical contexts (e.g., when seeking treatment) or legal contexts (e.g., when testifying as witnesses, victims, asylum-seekers). The current project will explore the relationship between PTSD, depression and trauma exposure, and suggestion-induced memory distortions. The proposed research will proceed in three strands. Strand 1 will determine whether prevailing models of false memory development can explain memory errors in psychopathology. A series of experiments will test theoretical predictions made by these models. Strand 2 will explore the role of metamemory in the development of false memories in people experiencing symptoms of psychopathology. For example, we will examine whether memory distrust influences the formation of suggestion-induced false memories in psychopathology and, if so, how this distrust affects individuals' expressions of confidence in their memories. Strand 3 will investigate practitioners' beliefs about memory reports elicited from individuals with psychopathology. To successfully translate the findings from Strands 1 and 2 to policy and practice, it is crucial to understand how legal and clinical professionals elicit and evaluate memory reports from individuals with psychopathology. The cognitive processes underlying false memory development are complex. The proposed research aims to substantially advance theoretical understanding of false memory formation in clinical contexts. Moreover, it will highlight how practitioners could design retrieval contexts that promote accurate remembering, and thus provide an empirical base for enhancing policy and practice. Given memory evidence is relied on heavily in clinical and legal contexts, it is essential to understand in what circumstances memory is most vulnerable, and to create conditions that minimise errors. To do this we need a better mechanistic understanding of how the symptoms of psychopathology interact with the processes that drive false memory production.