What can subjective forgetting tell us about memory for childhood trauma?
Open accessAbstract
In the present study, we examined the prevalence and predictors of subjective forgetting (i.e., self-reported amnesia) of child sexual abuse (CSA). Adults who, as children, were involved as victims in legal prosecutions were questioned about their CSA experiences, which had been documented in the 1980s, and about lost and recovered memory of those experiences. Males and individuals who experienced more severe abuse were more likely to report forgetting. The majority of individuals attributed their forgetting to active attempts to avoid thinking about the abuse. In contrast, when predictors of subjective forgetting were used to predict objective memory of abuse, more severe abuse and more extended legal involvement were associated with fewer memory errors. The differences between subjective and objective memory underscore the risks of using subjective measures to assess lost memory of abuse.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Forgetting has been documented for individual traumatic experiences and for repeated traumatic events such as childhood abuse.
“Forgetting has been documented for individual traumatic experiences [21] and for repeated traumatic events such as childhood abuse [22].”
From Memory and Forgetting (2018) · cites this paper as [22]
For the childhood-abuse clause attributed to this paper, the Results report that 15% of participants described a prior period of no memory for documented abuse; participants who experienced more frequent abuse were also more likely to say they could not remember it all. The Discussion cautions that these are reports of subjective forgetting, not documentation that the memories were actually inaccessible. The citation therefore supports reported forgetting in the context of repeated abuse, but not an unqualified claim of documented actual forgetting. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredTraumatic events are sometimes not well remembered and can be forgotten.
“Contrary to widespread opinion, traumatic events are sometimes not well remembered and can be forgotten.”
From Memory and Forgetting (2018) · cites this paper as [22]
The Results report that some participants with documented childhood sexual abuse described periods of complete forgetting. The Discussion cautions that self-reported forgetting may not reflect actual memory loss, and the study does not establish the broader claim for traumatic events generally. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 90 · Cited by 49
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- McNally, R. J. (2003). Remembering trauma. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press/Harvard University Press.
- McNally, R. J., Clancy, S. A., & Barrett, H. M. (2004). Forget- ting trauma? In D. Reisberg & P. Hertel (Eds.), Memory and emotion (pp. 129-154). New York: Oxford University Press.
- In J. D. Read & D. S. Lindsay (Eds.), Recollections of trauma: Scien- tific evidence and clinical practice (pp. 79-108). New York: Plenum.
- Sheiman, J. A. (1999). Sexual abuse history with and without self-report of memory loss: Differences in psychopathology, personality, and dissociation. In L. M. Williams & V. L. Banyard (Eds.), Trauma and memory (pp. 139-148). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Authors
- Ghetti, S., Edelstein, R. S., Goodman, G. S., Cordòn, I. M., Quas, J. A., Alexander, K. W., Redlich, A. D., & Jones, D. P. H.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Davis (US)
- University of Oslo (NO)
- University of Minnesota (US)
- University of California, Irvine (US)
- California State University, Sacramento (US)
- Policy Research Associates (US)
- University of Oxford (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Ghetti, Simona
- Goodman, Gail S.
- Quas, Jodi A.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Memory & Cognition
- Published
- 2006-07
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1011-1025
- ISSN
- 0090-502X (ISSN-L)
- 1532-5946
- OpenAlex
- W2089980649
- Cited by
- 49
- References
- 90
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 0.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Memory & Cognition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (9602125)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Identity, Memory, and Therapy
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
- Keywords
- child sexual abuse, recovered memory, memory errors, abuse severity, prosecution
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Child, Child Abuse, Sexual, Child, Preschool, Defense Mechanisms, Emotions, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Life Change Events, Male, Mental Recall, Repression, Psychology, Retention, Psychology, Set, Psychology, Sex Factors
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
