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

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

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.