Simulating memory impairment for child sexual abuse

The current study investigated effects of simulated memory impairment on later genuine memory performance. A total of 278 participants were tested for memory of a written child sexual abuse (CSA) scenario in which they pretended to be the victim. There were four experimental groups and two testing sessions. During Session 1, one group of participants was tested on what they actually recalled about the scenario (Genuine condition), whereas a second group was not tested at all (No Rehearsal condition). The third and fourth groups were asked to omit (Omission condition) or exaggerate (Commission condition) details of the scenario regarding incriminating evidence of CSA, respectively. One week later, at Session 2, all participants engaged in a recognition test in which they responded truthfully about the scenario. Half of the participants across conditions truthfully answered free recall and cued recall questions about the story, whereas half the participants answered no recall questions. Psychopathology measures of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and dissociation were also administered. Results showed that participants not tested for memory during the first session performed poorly in genuine-memory recall during the second session, likely due to lack of rehearsal. When considering recognition, participants in the Genuine condition produced significantly fewer false alarms than did participants in the other conditions. However, participants in the Commission condition evinced higher A' scores than those in the other conditions. Gender differences in memory were revealed wherein females tended to remember information better and made fewer commission errors than males. PTSD symptomology and greater dissociative tendencies were related to poorer memory performance. These findings are discussed in relation to memory theories that aid in understanding the effects of simulated memory impairment.