Moving toward a middle ground on the 'false memory debate': Reply to commentaries on lindsay and read

This rejoinder to the six commentaries on Lindsay and Read (this issue) focuses primarily on responding to criticisms levelled by some of the commentators, We clarify and elaborate upon the grounds for believing that some mental health practitioners use highly suggestive memory recovery therapies and that such therapies can lead some clients to develop illusory memories or false beliefs about childhood sexual abuse. We also comment on Pezdek's ideas concerning signal detection theory, Morton's application of the Headed Records model to amnesia and Multiple Personality Disorder, and to Sales, Shuman, and O'Connor's discussion of courtroom standards for the admissibility of expert psychological testimony.