Date of Award

2001

Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Department

Psychology

Abstract

Over the past decade, a contentious debate regarding delayed memories of child sexual abuse (CSA) has existed. Advocates on one side of the debate (Williams, 1994) maintain that common sequelae to traumatic events include memory disturbances. Dissociation and the dependent relationship between the victim and perpetrator are used to explain these memory disturbances. In contrast, proponents from the other end of the continuum (Loftus, 1993) argue abusive events are memorable, and suggestible clients adopt erroneous traumatic memories, as a result of leading questions used in therapy. The purpose of this study was to determine the epidemiology of CSA, and address this debate by examining differences in memory recall (i.e., no amnesia, and full or partial amnesia) on suggestibility, dissociation, and perceived emotional closeness with the perpetrator among women attending a Christian college who report CSA. There were 240 female participants who completed initial questionnaires, including demographics, questions regarding CSA, recall for the CSA, the perceived emotional closeness with the perpetrator, and the Dissociative Experiences Scale (Bernstein & Putnam, 1986). Among the 240 participants, 82 (36%) reported CSA and attended the follow-up interview where they completed the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale 2 (Gudjonsson, 1987). A MANOVA revealed no significant differences in memory recall on the combination of suggestibility, dissociation, and perceived emotional closeness with the perpetrator. Univariate ANOVAs were conducted to understand this finding. Individuals reporting full or partial amnesia perceived themselves to be significantly closer to the perpetrator(s) than individuals reporting no amnesia. Suggestibility and dissociation were not found to significantly differentiate the memory recall groups. Denial versus dissociation of the CSA and the experience of multiple traumas are discussed as possible explanations for these findings. Implications for clinicians working with clients reporting CSA, and recommendations for future research are also discussed.

Share

COinS