Drawing conclusions: confusion between data and theory in the traumatic memory debate.

The topic of traumatic memory has been a contentious and emotionally laden scientific controversy. The passion on both sides of the controversy has often led debaters to mischaracterize positions on the others side, leading to an imprecision in language and unscientific thinking that has clouded a debate that should at this point be closer to some acknowledged scientific consensus. Specifically, the consensus I have in mind, as stated by prominent cognitive psychologists, is the following: “Even the most conservative assessment of the evidence indicates that traumatic memories can fluctuate in their persistence, with periods of time in which the memories are relatively less accessible” (Edwards, Fivush, Anda, Felitti, & Nordenberg, 2001, p. 174); or: “The data converge on the conclusion that many survivors of childhood sexual abuse claim periods of amnesia for the traumatic experience” (Sivers, Schooler, & Freyd,