Skip to Main content Skip to Navigation
Journal articles

Research and clinical issues in trauma and dissociation: ethical and logical fallacies, myths, misreports, and misrepresentations.

Abstract : Introduction. The creation of a new journal on trauma and dissociation is an opportunity to take stock of existing models and theories in order to distinguish mythical, and sometimes dangerous, stories from established facts. Objective. To describe the professional, scientific, clinical, and ethical strategies and fallacies that must be envisaged when considering reports, claims, and recommendations relevant to trauma and dissociation. Method. After a general overview, two current debates in the field, the stabilisation controversy and the false/recovered memory controversy, are examined in detail to illustrate such issues. Results. Misrepresentations, misreports, ethical and logical fallacies are frequent in the general and scientific literature regarding the stabilisation and false/recovered memory controversies. Conclusion. A call is made for researchers and clinicians to strengthen their knowledge of and ability to identify such cognitive, logical, and ethical manoeuvres both in scientific literature and general media reports.
Document type :
Journal articles
Complete list of metadata

https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-02963722
Contributor : Jenny Ann Rydberg <>
Submitted on : Sunday, October 11, 2020 - 2:43:11 PM
Last modification on : Friday, March 5, 2021 - 1:56:56 PM

Identifiers

Collections

Citation

Jenny Ann Rydberg. Research and clinical issues in trauma and dissociation: ethical and logical fallacies, myths, misreports, and misrepresentations.. European Journal of Trauma and Dissociation, Elsevier, 2017, 1 (2), pp.89-99. ⟨10.1016/j.ejtd.2017.03.011⟩. ⟨halshs-02963722⟩

Share

Metrics

Record views

37