The Verifiability of Recovered Memories of Abuse
Abstract
Different ways of remembering sexual abuse - continuous memories, spontaneously recovered memories, and recovered memories following an active search - have been shown to differ in the availability of case-level corroborative evidence. The present study examined whether memory types in delayed sexual abuse statements also differ in terms of verifiability, a statement feature previously associated with differences between truthful and deceptive accounts. Victim statements from archival police files (N = 140) were classified according to how the abuse was remembered. Confirmatory analyses showed that statements based on continuous memories contained more verifiable details than statements based on recovered memories following an active search. Exploratory analyses indicated that details reported following an active search were more often disconfirmed than those reported in continuous or spontaneously recovered memories. Verifiability may extend beyond deception detection paradigms to capture systematic differences associated with memory retrieval and reconstruction processes in delayed sexual abuse reports.
Related
- Antimicrobial Resistance Patterns Among Gram-Negative Bacterial Isolates Recovered from Tracheal Aspirate Cultures in Türkiye: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- Resilience and clinical recovery in first-episode schizophrenia: a 10-year longitudinal study of clinically recovered, non-recovered, and healthy control participants
- Heart Failure with Recovered Ejection Fraction: EGPA-Associated Cardiomyopathy Treated with Benralizumab
- A Family-Inclusive, Visually Supported Sexual Abuse Prevention Intervention for Children with Moderate Intellectual Disabilities
- Association between NMDAR antagonists, drug abuse and dependence
BibTeX
@misc{beek2026verifiability,
title = {{The Verifiability of Recovered Memories of Abuse}},
author = {Mirjam ter Beek and Henry and Linsey Raymaekers and Corine de Ruiter and Paul Riesthuis and Tamara L. F. De Beuf and Anne Hoving and Meike Hogenkamp and Bruno verschuere},
howpublished = {PsyArXiv},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.31234/osf.io/4nt6p_v2},
url = {https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/4nt6p_v2/},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - The Verifiability of Recovered Memories of Abuse
AU - Mirjam ter Beek
AU - Henry
AU - Linsey Raymaekers
AU - Corine de Ruiter
AU - Paul Riesthuis
AU - Tamara L. F. De Beuf
AU - Anne Hoving
AU - Meike Hogenkamp
AU - Bruno verschuere
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/13
PB - PsyArXiv
DO - 10.31234/osf.io/4nt6p_v2
UR - https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/4nt6p_v2/
AB - Different ways of remembering sexual abuse - continuous memories, spontaneously recovered memories, and recovered memories following an active search - have been shown to differ in the availability of case-level corroborative evidence. The present study examined whether memory types in delayed sexual abuse statements also differ in terms of verifiability, a statement feature previously associated with differences between truthful and deceptive accounts. Victim statements from archival police files (N = 140) were classified according to how the abuse was remembered. Confirmatory analyses showed that statements based on continuous memories contained more verifiable details than statements based on recovered memories following an active search. Exploratory analyses indicated that details reported following an active search were more often disconfirmed than those reported in continuous or spontaneously recovered memories. Verifiability may extend beyond deception detection paradigms to capture systematic differences associated with memory retrieval and reconstruction processes in delayed sexual abuse reports.
ER -