The evidence for 'repression': an examination of Holmes (1990) and the implications for the recovered memory controversy.

A literature review by Holmes (1990) has been frequently cited as being evidence against the reality of recovered memories of child sexual abuse. In the current article, the specifics of Holmes' review and its implications for the recovered memory controversy are examined. Based on the focus of his review, the type of data that he examined, and the specifics of his conclusions, it is concluded that Holmes (1990) has clearly been cited out of context. His conclusions do not allow one to make inferences about the reality of amnesia for trauma or subsequent recovery of memories. Furthermore, a wealth of clinical and experimental data do support the existence of such phenomena. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]