Manipulating Human Memory Through Reconsolidation: A Reply to Commentaries

摘要

In our article “Manipulating Human Memory Through Reconsolidation: Ethical Implications of a New Therapeutic Approach,” we argued that ethical discussion surrounding new developments in the psychological and biological sciences should be firmly grounded in empirical research. With this in mind, we outlined research regarding the disruption of memory reconsolidation through the combination of memory reactivation and propranolol administration. We then considered several commonly voiced objections to similar memory-modifying procedures, as well as discussing several new possible ethical implications. Drawing on existing research, we argued that many issues regarding the use of propranolol so as to interfere with memory consolidation and reconsolidation, such as the potential for producing declarative memory amnesia or accidently erasing the wrong memories, had been overstated: a conclusion that we stand by. Research bears out that propranolol’s effects are circumscribed, have a principal effect on the affective dimension of a memory, and do not result in a general dampening of emotional responses or prevent new learning at a later time. Furthermore, such memory-modifying effects are increasingly being shown to occur only under specific conditions and may be very difficult to achieve (e.g., Sevenster, Beckers, and Kindt, 2013), a consideration which ought not nullify, but should at least temper, worries over the widespread usage of propranolol to neutralize the plethora of emotional burdens with which people deal on a daily basis.