Posted by lurker (who seriously thinks it's about time for a pseudoname change). on February 28, 1999 at 13:58:51:
In Reply to: Ethics & Behavior, 'lurkers,' notes and queries . . . Loftus, Freyd et alii posted by William Scherk on February 26, 1999 at 21:47:53:
: Interesting exchanges on the subject of the 'lost in mall' experiments. I've spent a couple of hours trying to track down the journal Ethics & Behavior. It is, unfortunately, not available at any public or university library in British Columbia, so I am unable to comment on the article, only the abstract (and attitude) provided by 'lurker.'
It's me, the real lurker. Nice to meet you (-: Attitude? I did not post that comment on the article you refer to, and must admit, that I have been restraining myself on posting anything further on the board until the idiot who is posting under other people's pseudonames stops. Having said that, I considered sending you an e-mail off-line, but decided to go ahead and post here in response to your comment (-:
Hello William,
: It would seem that the anonymous 'lurker' is pleased to label 'fraudulent' any experiment or set of experiments that do not sit well with her ideological standpoint.
huh? This statement implies that I have done so elsewhere. I do not believe that I, the real me, has ever done any such thing. However, it is possible that someone is running around posting under my pseudoname and saying such. Once again, I would be interested in the posts you are referring to.
: It might seem to 'lurker' that if the Loftus experiments with false memories of trauma could be dismissed, exposed as junk science, or shown to be riddled with error, then the entire edifice of opinion that questions the accuracy of 'recovered memories' would fall, criticially wounded, and dissolve into gas.
I studied Loftus' work in a graduate course in Forensic Psychology some time ago. She has also done work with respect to 'Eye Witness Testimony,' and, I believe, co-authored a book on such. I hold her work in high regard; nothing here or elsewhere has proven otherwise.
: Well . . . 'lurker' . . . this is not at all likely. Doubt and skepticism of the accuracy of 'recovered memories' of child sexual abuse are due to far more than this particular aspect of the work of Dr. Loftus.
Retrograde amnesia, however, has been proven to scientifically occur; I think Dr Loftus, though I cannot speak for her, would agree with me on this. Retrograde amnesia is a physical anomally, usually caused by a blow to the head, etc., and is usually irreversible, due to damage that occurs to the brain, unless healing is affected within days of the injury. This is quite different from 'repressed memories,' that allegedly 'stay repressed' for years, before 'surfacing in therapy'
Absolutely. A number of other well respect scientists have studied the efficacy of 'recovered memories' as well. Also, I wrote a paper for the aforementioned course, regarding amnesia, to include 'repressed memories' and retrograde amnesia. And… once again, I must side with Loftus, et. al on this one, 'repressed memories' are suspect.
: I would hope that someone with access to the issue brought forward by 'lurker' will take the time to read and comment on the entire article, as well, of course, as Dr. Loftus' response.
: I would also like to have some information on the journal itself. The only references to it that I have been able to find (an admittedly limited search) have been article abstracts such as these featured below.
: Is it possible that 'Ethics and Behavior' is a type of 'house organ' for the coterie of adherents to Jennifer Freyd's theories of traumatic betrayal?
: Interesting how 'lurker' lards up the posting of the Crook & Dean abstract with plentiful booga-booga editorial fudge . . . EXPOSED! Fraudulent!
Of course. And it did get your attention, did it not? I would assume that the 'fraudulent' lurker meant to do that very thing.
: One of 'lurker's asonishingly stupid also-rans makes a consistent point of ranting against Dr. Loftus -- as liar, hypocrite, scientific fraud, and, intriguingly, someone who did an about-face on the subject of 'recovered' memories.' Indeed, in this alternate universe of undented ideological rectitude, Loftus is said to have recovered memories of childhood sexual abuse herself, only to turn about and deny this reality when the gravy train of the FMSF was about to leave the station.
As I stated earlier in this post, I hold Dr Loftus in high regard; and even if I did question her 'ethics' or the efficacy of her experiments, it is not my style to publicly deride her here, or elsewhere to such.
Once again, I am mystified; ranting against Dr. Loftus? Me? I happened to have read the article regarding her 'about-face' on the subject of 'recovered memories,' and do not discount her studies at all. In fact, it even adds credence to her studies. When I read that interview, I felt really bad for what had happened to Ms Loftus. To think, that she grew up thinking that she was the one who had found her father in the pool, how awful that must have been for her. It is no wonder then, that she is interested in the efficacy of recall (usually those who are profoundly affect, tend to pursue avenues to understand).
: These illogical and incorrect fixations are dealt with { Loftus & 'Memories' ] briskly, but the misinformation will rise again. I have managed to gain permission from Dr. Loftus to mirror her copyrighted articles, though, so that we may rebut her rather frothingly vituperative opponents in forums such as these, with ease, and with well-indexed hyperlinked texts. I will post to this board these relevant links.
Great Link! Glad that you have provided it (I will be heading over to read it in the near future).
: In the meantime, comments on the two Freyd aricles in 'Ethics & Behavior'? Has anyone read them?
I have not, but am in the process of tracking this journal down. Will get back to you once I find it.
: ( from: Selected Traumatic Amnesia Publications [at] http://dynamic.uoregon.edu/~jjf/trauma.html )
: Freyd, Jennifer J. (1994).
: Betrayal trauma: Traumatic amnesia as an adaptive response to childhood abuse. **Ethics & Behavior**
: 4 (4) 307-329.
: Abstract: Describes psychogenic amnesia as an adaptive response to childhood abuse based on
: betrayal trauma theory. Why amnesia is a response to childhood abuse, the cognitive architecture of
: these dissociations, why and how traumatic amnesia occurs, and the implications of these findings are
: discussed. Victims may need to remain unaware of the trauma not to reduce suffering but rather to
: promote survival. Amnesia enables the child to maintain an attachment with a figure vital to survival,
: development, and thriving. Analysis of evolutionary pressures, mental modules, social cognition, and
: developmental needs suggests that the degree to which the most fundamental human ethics are
: violated can influence the nature, form, and processes of trauma and responses to trauma.
: (PsycINFO Database)
: Ordering: The Ethics & Behavior issue can be ordered from LEA by calling 1-800-9BOOKS9,
: fax to 201/236-0072, or e-mail to orders@leahq.mhs.compuserve.com.
: Freyd, J. J. (1998)
: Science in the Memory Debate. Ethics & Behavior, 8 (2), 101-113.
: Abstract: Experimental Psychology has much to offer the current debate about memories of
: childhood abuse. However, laboratory scientists, with their enormous cognitive authority to define
: reality for the rest of the population, must be especially conservative when arguing that laboratory
: results on memory generalize to contested memories of abuse. Researchers must make an effort to
: untangle the appropriate from inappropriate application of research results to this debate. A crucial
: untangling strategy for future research on general phenomena involves taking care to pose questions
: separately. When the research is disseminated, its relevance and its limitations must be carefully
: communicated. Finally, scientists must attend to their power to define reality for others.
: Ordering: This article appeared in a Special Issue of Ethics & Behavior. Other contributors include
: ***Ross Cheit, Anna Salter, David Calof, Jennifer Hoult, Laura Brown***. The special issue (Volume 8,
: Number 2) of Ethics & Behavior can be ordered from LEA by calling 1-800-9BOOKS9, fax to
: 201/236-0072, or e-mail to orders@leahq.mhs.compuserve.com.
Please try and not jump to conclusions. It only makes things worse. I have no idea what the heck is going on in this message forum or elsewhere; I received an e-mail asking why I deleted "Gary Cooper's" post over on my other message board. I did not, of course, and immediately changed my password. Boy, talking about the levels of paranoia this stuff can elicit. Someone has gone over the edge. And it is clear from last week's rash of 'fraudulent' posts, and recent occurences, that somebody hit a nerve. I am curious what this nerve was; but we may never know. Though, I believe that many will be holding their breath for a while to see what happens. Once again, I am refraining future response on this message board until this whole mess blows over. I will respond on the other message board though, since it captures IP Addresses. I doubt the psycho-poster will dare show his/her face over there (grin). I will forward to you anything I dig up on the 'ethics and behavior' articles, via e-mail. And please feel free to contact me off-line at CyberLurker@JusticeMail.com. Regards,
William,
lurker (who seriously thinks it's about time for a pseudoname change).