Judges and lawyers’ beliefs in repression and dissociative amnesia may imperil justice

Further guidance required

Datos Bibliográficos

ID21602020
AutoresPamela J Radcliffe (University of Portsmouth), Pamela Radcliffe (University of Portsmouth, autor de correspondencia), Lawrence Patihis (0000-0003-2870-8986, University of Portsmouth)
Año2024
Volumen32
Número8
Páginas1083-1099
Fecha de publicación2024-09-13
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaMemory (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0965-8211 • E-ISSN: 1464-0686
EditorialInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/09658211.2024.2383311
PMID39146469
OpenAlexW4401606646
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas4
Referencias citadas84

717). Delayed allegations of child sexual and physical abuse are prevalent in Western legal systems and often rely upon uncorroborated memory testimony to prove guilt. U.K. legal professionals and jurors typically assess the reliability of such memory recall via common sense, yet decades of scientific research show common sense beliefs often conflict with science. Recent international surveys show controversial notions of repression and accurate memory recovery remain strongly endorsed. In historical cases, these notions may lead to wrongful convictions. The current study surveyed the U.K. public, lawyers, and mental health professionals' beliefs about repression, dissociative amnesia and false memories. Study findings give unique data on judges' and barristers' beliefs. Overall, the study findings reinforce international scientists' concerns of a science - knowledge-gap. Repression was strongly endorsed by lay, legal and clinical participants (> 78%) as was dissociative amnesia (> 87%). Moreover, suboptimal professional legal education and juror guidance may increase misunderstanding. Correcting beliefs about memory function, and extending the contribution of memory science in the courtroom remains an important quest for cognitive scientists

Amnesia · Cognitive psychology · Criminology · Dissociative · Economic Justice · Political science · Psychiatry · Psychoanalysis · Psychological repression · Child Abuse and Trauma · Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis · Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints · Law · Psychology · Social Psychology