↓ Skip to main content

True and false recovered memories : toward a reconciliation of the debate

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 4: Searching for repressed memory.
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

1 blog
2 X users


30 Dimensions

Readers on

77 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Chapter title
Searching for repressed memory.
Chapter number 4
Book title
True and False Recovered Memories
Published in
Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, February 2012
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-1195-6_4
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4614-1194-9, 978-1-4614-1195-6

McNally RJ, McNally, Richard J., Richard J. McNally


This chapter summarizes the work of my research group on adults who report either repressed, recovered, or continuous memories of childhood sexual abuse (CSA) or who report no history of CSA. Adapting paradigms from cognitive psychology, we tested hypotheses inspired by both the "repressed memory" and "false memory" perspectives on recovered memories of CSA. We found some evidence for the false memory perspective, but no evidence for the repressed memory perspective. However, our work also suggests a third perspective on recovered memories that does not require the concept of repression. Some children do not understand their CSA when it occurs, and do not experience terror. Years later, they recall the experience, and understanding it as abuse, suffer intense distress. The memory failed to come to mind for years, partly because the child did not encode it as terrifying (i.e., traumatic), not because the person was unable to recall it.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 73 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 22 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 32 42%
Neuroscience 5 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 23 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 August 2022.
All research outputs
of 24,518,979 outputs
Outputs from Nebraska Symposium on Motivation
of 49 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 256,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nebraska Symposium on Motivation
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,518,979 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 49 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one scored the same or higher as 40 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 256,381 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.