{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020654044750430294, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0034423407917383822, 'mean_word_length': 5.722543352601156, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Explaining the Forgetting and Recovery of Abuse and Trauma Memories: Possible Mechanisms

Much attention has been focused on memories of abuse that are allegedly forgotten or repressed then recovered. By retrospectively surveying more than 1,400 college women, the authors investigated (a) the frequency with which temporary forgetting is reported for child sexual abuse experiences as opposed to other childhood abuse and traumas and (b) exactly how victims characterize their forgetting experiences in terms of various competing cognitive mechanisms. Rates of forgetting were similar among victims who experienced sexual abuse, physical abuse, and multiple types of traumas. Victims of other types of childhood traumas (e.g., car accidents) reported less forgetting than victims of childhood sexual abuse or multiple types of trauma. Most victims' characterizations of their forgetting experiences were not indicative of repression in the classic Freudian sense but instead suggested other more common mechanisms, such as directed forgetting and relabeling. The implications of these findings for psychological theory, clinical practice, and law are discussed.