LORANDOS: It appears that you subscribe to Freudian theory, correct?
Witness: To a certain degree, yes.
LORANDOS: Alright. Freudian theory assumes that emotional and behavioral problems originate as a result of some significant childhood experiences, correct?
Witness: Correct, yes.
LORANDOS: And in particular Freudian theory would be interested in 1) a history of family conflict in childhood, correct?
Witness: It could be, yes.
LORANDOS: And Freudian theory would be interested in 2) the extent to which someone recalls their mother as, being depressed for example, correct?
Witness: That might be another issue of interest, yes.
LORANDOS: And Freudian theory would be interested in 3) how attached someone felt as a child to their family, correct?
Witness: Yes, that could also be an issue of interest
LORANDOS: Now previously we talked about journals and I want to ask you if the Journal of Psychological Assessment is a generally accepted and recognized peer review journal in your field.
Witness: Yes it is, yes.
LORANDOS: And a 1994 study by Henry and his colleagues published in the Journal of Psychological Assessment, titled, On Remembrance of Things Past: A Longitudinal Evaluation of the Retrospective Method, might be relevant to your opinions in this case, correct?
Witness: It could be, yes.
LORANDOS: I'd like you to consider this research study which involved the following 5 steps and I'm going to give you a hypothetical. 1) Children were interviewed at the ages of 7, 9, 11, 13, and 19. 2) The mothers of these children were also asked questions regarding a) the extent of conflict in their families and b) the degree to which they felt depressed. 3) At the ages 13 and 15 the children were also asked how attached they felt to their families. And 4) At the age of 18 these children were asked a) between the ages of 7 and 15, how much conflict was there in your family b) when you were between the ages of 7 and 15, how often did your mother seem depressed and c) when you were about 13 to 15 years old, how close did you feel to your parents. Ok? Got that?
Witness: I think so, yes.
LORANDOS: And the last part of the hypothetical, the children's responses to these questions at age 18 were correlated with the information obtained when they were younger, ok?
Witness: Yes.
LORANDOS: In particular, the children's responses to these questions were expressed in terms of a correlation coefficient and a correlation coefficient can range from zero to one, correct?
Witness: Correct.
LORANDOS: And a correlation coefficient of one corresponds to an exact one-to-one relationship between previous information and present replies, correct?
Witness: Yes, correct.
LORANDOS: And a correlation of zero corresponds to no relationship whatsoever between previous information and present replies correct?
Witness: Again correct.
LORANDOS: Would it surprise you to know that when asked between the ages of 7 and 15 "How much conflict was there in your family?" the mean correlation between the previous information and the present replies was .19?
Witness: Yes it would surprise me.
LORANDOS: Because .19, that's not a very high correlation is it?
Witness: No.
LORANDOS: And a correlation of only .19 indicates that what these 18 year olds thought they remembered about family conflict between the ages of 7 and 15 was not very accurate, correct?
Witness: That's what that study would indicate, yes.
LORANDOS: Would it surprise you to know that when asked between the ages of 7 and 15 "How often did your mother seemed depressed?" the mean correlation between the previous information, that that was taken at the time by the evaluators, and the present replies of the children was .16?
Witness: Yes, I am surprised by that.
LORANDOS: Indeed. A correlation of .16, that's also not very high is it doctor?
Witness: No it's not.
LORANDOS: And a correlation of only .16 indicates that what these 18 year olds thought they remembered about their mothers being depressed was not very accurate, correct?
Witness: That's what that study indicates.
LORANDOS: Would it surprise you to know that when asked while between the ages of 7 and 15 years old, "How close do you feel toward your parents?" the mean correlation between the previous information and the present replies was only .36?
Witness: Yes, I am also somewhat surprised by that.
LORANDOS: Indeed, because a correlation of .36; that's not a very high correlation is it doctor?
Witness: No.
LORANDOS: And a correlation of only.36 indicates that what these 18 year olds thought that they remembered about how close they had felt to their family was not very accurate, correct?
Witness: That's what that study indicates, yes.
LORANDOS: Therefore, we know that 18 year olds do not accurately recall details regarding 1) past family conflict, correct?
Witness: That's what that study indicates.
LORANDOS: And 18 year olds do not accurately recall details regarding 2) whether their mother was depressed, correct?
Witness: The study also seems to indicate that.
LORANDOS: And 18 year olds do not accurately recall details regarding 3) how attached they previously felt to their parents, correct?
Witness: According to this study that you're citing, yes.
LORANDOS: But these are the kinds of issues that Freudian theorists are particularly interested in, correct?
Witness: They can be.
LORANDOS: Therefore, asking about 1) your past family conflict and 2) whether their mother was depressed and 3) how attached the felt previously to their parents, led them into guesswork, correct?
Witness: Well, according to that study, that appears to be the case.
LORANDOS: Asking people these kinds of questions about their childhood leads them into guesswork and speculation because memories of those events because memories of those events are rather poor, correct?
Witness: Well, according to the study that you're citing, that study appears to demonstrate that outcome.
LORANDOS: Indeed, experience of past family conflict could be ambiguous, correct?
Witness: Yes.
LORANDOS: Experiences of your mother's depression could be ambiguous, correct?
Witness: Yes.
LORANDOS: And experiences of past closeness with family members could be ambiguous, correct?
Witness: Again, yes, yes.
LORANDOS: In other words, these events are open to varying interpretation, correct?
Witness: Yes.
LORANDOS: Questions about such events invite us to resort to imaginations at times, correct?
Witness: That could happen.
LORANDOS: And people can find it very difficult to discriminate between what they accurately recall from past events and what they only imagine about past events, correct?
Witness: That can also happen.
LORANDOS: Therefore, you are obligated by your ethical codes to acknowledge that a Freudian emphasis on childhood events as influencing present-day circumstances might be ill-informed and ill-advised, correct?
Witness: Well, you've cited one study.
LORANDOS: Listen carefully to my question doctor. As an ethical professional, aware of the science in your field, you are obligated by your ethical codes to acknowledge that a Freudian emphasis on childhood events as influencing present day circumstances may be ill-informed and ill-advised, correct?
Witness: Well, if I have to confine myself to that one study, than I would have to say yes.
LORANDOS: And you have not published anything in a peer review journal necessitating that we revisit and reevaluate the study by Henry that I cited to you?
Witness: No.
LORANDOS: And you cannot cite anything from a peer review scientific journal that indicates that these results are no longer valid, correct?
Witness: Right off the top of my head, as I sit here, no.
LORANDOS: Thank you.
