1996 00 00 Psychological Inquiry - Vol 7 No 2 - Clark and Loftus

Magazine Overview

Title: Psychological Inquiry
Issue: Vol. 7, No. 2
Publication Date: 1996
Publisher: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
Country: United States
Language: English

This issue of *Psychological Inquiry* features a significant commentary titled "The Construction of Space Alien Abduction Memories" by Steven E. Clark and Elizabeth F. Loftus. The issue also includes a commentary by Robert L. Hall, along with extensive reference lists and notes on the authors.

The Construction of Space Alien Abduction Memories

Steven E. Clark and Elizabeth F. Loftus, from the University of California, Riverside, and the University of Washington, respectively, present a critical analysis of space alien abduction narratives. They build upon the work of Newman and Baumeister, who reviewed the abduction literature and suggested that these narratives are not evidence of alien visitation but rather a reflection of human psychology.

Clark and Loftus argue that space alien abduction memories are a variant of the "misinformation effect," a well-documented phenomenon where memory can be distorted by post-event information. They cite classic experiments, such as the "stop sign" study by Loftus, Miller, and Burns (1978), which demonstrated how easily people can be led to misremember details of an event.

They extend this concept to the more complex phenomenon of abduction memories, referencing studies where false memories, such as being lost in a shopping mall, were successfully implanted in subjects. They note that while such events might seem unusual, research by Hyman, Husband, and Billings (1995) shows that even more significant events, like an overnight hospital stay, can be falsely remembered.

Examples of dramatic false memory implantations include the case of Jean Piaget, who described a childhood kidnapping attempt that was later revealed to be a hoax, and the case of Paul Ingram, who confessed to ritual sexual abuse of his children after being pressured by detectives, later confessing to a fabricated accusation as well.

The Misinformation Effect: From Stop Signs to Space Aliens

The authors detail the misinformation effect, illustrating it with the car-pedestrian accident experiment where subjects were shown a yield sign but later recalled seeing a stop sign. This error, made with high confidence, highlights the malleability of memory. They explain that while implanting a false memory of a stop sign is one thing, convincing someone they were abducted by aliens is a more complex, but empirically traceable, path.

Loftus and her colleagues' work on implanting false memories of being lost in a shopping mall is discussed, where 25% of subjects "remembered" the false event. The authors note that such memories can be elaborated with further false details, such as specific store names or descriptions of people involved.

The Makings of an Abduction Memory

Clark and Loftus question why false memories specifically about space alien abductions are so prevalent. They suggest that elements like hypnagogic and hypnopompic hallucinations, nightmares, and "missing time"—common in sleep or during long drives—are consistent with abduction narratives. These are not signs of psychopathy but natural consequences of sleep-related brain activity.

The authors propose a "source- or reality-monitoring problem," where individuals might have a memory of a strange event but misattribute its source as extraterrestrial rather than internal (e.g., a hallucination). This problem is compounded by the cultural fascination with alien visitation, which has led to an exponential increase in abduction stories in media and popular culture.

The "restaurant script" analogy is used to describe how abduction narratives have become a well-known activity with predictable actions and order, similar to common social scripts.

Interestingly, the authors suggest that more obscure science-fiction tales, rather than popular images like Mr. Spock, might contribute to abduction stories, as the source of vague images from less popular media might be more easily confused with personal experience.

Hypnosis is identified as a key tool in the creation of abduction memories. They cite studies showing that a high percentage of abduction stories are produced under hypnosis. However, decades of research indicate that hypnosis does not improve memory accuracy; it merely increases output and makes individuals more vulnerable to suggestion. Consequently, hypnotically induced testimony is often inadmissible in court.

Organizations like the American Medical Association and the International Society of Hypnosis have issued warnings about the use of hypnosis for memory retrieval.

The variation among abduction stories, noted by researchers like Klass and Vallee, is suggested to be between investigators rather than within them. Mack's belief in the authenticity of his clients' abduction tales, based on their consistency, is countered by Clark and Loftus's argument that this consistency might stem from the hypnotist's suggestion. They also note the recurring theme of warnings about humanity's violent future in many abduction narratives, which aligns with Mack's own published works.

Maintenance of Abduction Memories

Abduction memories are characterized by high confidence, which the authors note is often mistaken for accuracy. However, research demonstrates that the correlation between confidence and accuracy in memory is weak and sometimes negative. Dissociations between confidence and accuracy may arise from basic memory functioning or be influenced by social factors.

Visual imagery, often strong in hypnotically induced memories, can persist, leading to a strong memory for the abduction experience, even if it occurred in the hypnotist's office. Social factors, such as the need to bolster a threatened belief, can contribute to this confidence. Support groups for "abductees" play a role in reinforcing these beliefs, as demonstrated in laboratory studies where witness confidence can be artificially inflated.

Concluding Remarks

Clark and Loftus reiterate that human memory is malleable and that elaborate, false memories of space alien abduction can be constructed from sleep-related hallucinations, nightmares, media portrayals, hypnotic suggestion, and validation from support groups. They acknowledge Newman and Baumeister's suggestion that sadomasochistic fantasies and an escape from self might be additional elements, though this is outside their expertise as memory researchers.

Commentary by Robert L. Hall

Robert L. Hall, from St. Michaels, Maryland, commends Newman and Baumeister for their courage in addressing the perplexing phenomenon of UFO abductions and *Psychological Inquiry* for fostering public discussion. He acknowledges that studying UFO reports can lead to ridicule but asserts that the basic behavioral facts are well-documented and have persisted over decades.

Hall agrees with Newman and Baumeister that abduction reports occur regularly and share common themes. He emphasizes that those who have experienced these events are generally sincere in their beliefs, and many exhibit psychological symptoms similar to posttraumatic stress disorder, but not delusional illness beyond the abduction claims themselves.

He suggests that the question is not whether these experiences are real alien visitations, but rather what they reveal about ourselves and the workings of the human mind. Hall concludes that the "pay dirt" in alien abduction stories lies in understanding these psychological aspects.

Notes

Contact information is provided for Steven E. Clark and Elizabeth F. Loftus.

References

A comprehensive list of references is provided, citing works on memory, hypnosis, psychology, UFOs, and related topics. Key references include works by Bower, Bullard, Clark, Deffenbacher, Festinger, Fiore, Freud, Hyman, Johnson, Klass, Loftus, Mack, Ofshe, Piaget, Sagan, Spanos, Tavris, Vallee, Wells, and Wright.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The central theme of this issue is the psychological construction of memory, specifically in the context of space alien abduction narratives. The commentary by Clark and Loftus strongly advocates for a psychological explanation, viewing abduction memories as a product of suggestibility, misinformation, and cultural narratives rather than literal events. They emphasize the malleability of human memory and the influence of external factors like hypnosis and media. The editorial stance, as represented by Clark and Loftus, is critical of the literal interpretation of abduction claims, focusing instead on the cognitive and social processes that may lead to their formation and maintenance. Robert L. Hall's commentary, while acknowledging the sincerity of abductees and the persistence of the phenomenon, also aligns with the focus on understanding the psychological underpinnings rather than validating the extraterrestrial hypothesis.