Science and Pseudoscience Around Dissociation and Dissociative Amnesia: A Two-Branched Experimental Approach.

一些心理学家关注的效果，目前的概念化，以及对现实的法律决策解离的影响。公众对记忆的误解令人担忧，因为他们可以在涉及延迟性指控的案件中担任陪审员。这一提议涉及两个实验分支，旨在质疑这个有100年历史的结构的基本可靠性，以及它在今天的心理学中是否仍然有一席之地。研究数据可能表明，在依赖于长期记忆的案件中，需要修订最高法院的指导。分支一将研究术语和其他因素如何影响人们的法律的决策：特别是关于被压抑的记忆（与解离性失忆症）是否可以作为证据在法庭上被接受的话题。它还将调查术语对依赖恢复记忆的案件的潜在判决的影响，以及社交媒体视频（不是由研究人员创建的）是否具有同样的影响。分离症状和机制是专家证人在一些法庭案件中提出的一个概念，通常是为控方，以支持被压抑记忆证词的可接受性。然而，解离可能并不是一个真正结合在一起的复合体。潜在的内部不可靠，因此当以更好奇的方式测量时无效。分支二将调查和利用一些最广泛使用的解离测量方法，以揭示它们可能是不可靠和无效的，这些不精确的测量方法和概念在DSM中，并保持由巴黎催眠学派引入的旧伪科学思想。

Some psychologists are concerned over the effect, present conceptualisation, and impact of dissociation on reallegal decisions. Concern about the general public's supposed misunderstanding of memory is compounded by thefact that they could serve as jurors in cases involving delayed sexual accusations. This proposal involves twoexperimental branches aiming to question the fundamental reliability of this 100-year-old construct, and thereforewhether it still has a place in psychology today. Research data may indicate the need for revised crown-courtguidance in cases reliant on long-term memory.Branch one will examine how terminology and other factors influence people's legal decision-making: especially onthe topic of whether repressed memories (vs. dissociative amnesia) would be admissible in court as evidence. It willalso investigate the influence of terminology on potential verdicts in cases reliant on recovered memory andwhether social media videos (not created by the researcher) carry this same influence.Dissociative symptoms and mechanisms are a concept presented in some court cases by expert witnesses, usuallyfor the prosecution, to bolster the admissibility of repressed memory testimony. However, Dissociation may not be asyndrome that actually holds together. Potentially being internally unreliable and therefore invalid when measuredin a more inquisitive way. Branch two will investigate and utilise some of the most widely used measures ofdissociation to likely reveal they are unreliable and invalid-and that these imprecise measures and concepts are inthe DSM and maintain old pseudoscientific ideas introduced by the Paris school of hypnosis.