The knowledge and application of a cognitive and trauma memory scale (KAMS): The development of a reliable and valid scale

Authors have debated the existence of repressed and false memory, and have accused therapists of implanting false memories in trauma survivors (Briere, 1995; Brown, 1995, 1996; Enns, 1995; Loftus, 1994, 1998; Ofshe & Waters, 1994). This study attempted to develop a reliable and valid scale to measure therapists\u27 knowledge and application of traumatic and cognitive memory structures and processes. Five separate studies were conducted: item development, scale development, test-retest reliability, validity study 1 with students, and validity study 2 with therapists. The scale was developed from cognitive and trauma literature and with consultation with content experts. One hundred seventy-five items were assigned to 4 subscales, (1) cognitive memory structures and processes knowledge, (2) cognitive memory application, (3) trauma memory knowledge, and (4) trauma memory application. In the scale development study, the initial 175 items were reduced to 60 items, with 15 in each subscale. The results suggested support for internal consistency reliability; however, the results of a later study did not support internal consistency. Test-retest reliability was established. Divergent validity of the KAMS subscales was supported, as the KAMS did not correlate with feminism or social desirability. Convergent validity of the cognitive memory structures and processes knowledge subscale was mildly supported. The results suggest that convergent validity of the KAMS trauma memory, cognitive memory application, and trauma memory application subscales was not established