Suggestibility and False Memory Formation in Psychopathology

暗示性访谈技巧可以极大地改变人们的回忆，有时会产生实质性的后果（Wade et al., 2010; Nash & Wade, 2009）。然而，正如科学所表明的那样，没有人能够不受暗示技巧和记忆扭曲的影响，某些认知能力和人格特征使一些人特别容易受到影响（Patihis et al., 2013）。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暗示引起的记忆扭曲，但检查精神病理学和易受暗示之间联系的研究很少。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被要求在临床背景下（例如，寻求治疗时）或法律背景下（例如，作为证人，受害者，寻求庇护者作证时）准确和反复地回忆情感，个人经历。目前的项目将探讨创伤后应激障碍、抑郁症和创伤暴露以及暗示诱发的记忆扭曲之间的关系。拟议的研究将分三部分进行。Strand 1将决定错误记忆发展的主流模型是否可以解释精神病理学中的记忆错误。一系列的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影响精神病理学中暗示诱发的错误记忆的形成，如果是，这种不信任如何影响个人对记忆的信心表达。Strand 3将调查从业者对从精神病理患者那里得到的记忆报告的看法。为了成功地将第1和第2部分的发现转化为政策和实践，了解法律和临床专业人员如何从精神病理患者那里引出和评估记忆报告是至关重要的。错误记忆发展的认知过程是复杂的。本研究的目的是在临床环境中对错误记忆形成的理论理解进行实质性的推进。此外，它将强调从业者如何设计检索上下文，以促进准确记忆，从而为加强政策和实践提供经验基础。鉴于记忆证据在临床和法律环境中严重依赖，了解记忆在什么情况下是最脆弱的，并创造最小化错误的条件是至关重要的。要做到这一点，我们需要更好地从机制上理解精神病理症状是如何与驱动错误记忆产生的过程相互作用的。

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.